Andy Murray - a Technical discussion and his chances of Major success in 2010 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Andy Murray - a Technical discussion and his chances of Major success in 2010

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 07:21 PM
Andy Murray is the best player to come out of Britain since Tim Henman. In some ways Murray is better than Henman with more titles at the age of 22 than Henman had in his career. Plus Murray has already played in a Major final. Despite this I find myself thinking Murray is still far away from a Major title and needs a combination of luck and a change of attitude.

I had my first opportunity to see Murray up close in the quarterfinal of the French Open this year against Fernando Gonzalez (Andy was thrashed) That thrashing confirmed some of the misgivings I have about Murray’s game.

First of all, Murray is the tallest counter puncher I’ve come across (or is that Monfils?). Usually guys that height are looking to impose their game on their opponents. What amazed me was the lack of weight of shot by Murray, not much depth and not very fast. I’ve been going to live tournaments since 1995 and seen most players, Fabrice Santoro is the only other player I’ve seen hit ground strokes without much pace or depth. What was really depressing was Andy’s 2nd serve, it could only be described as powderpuff and Fernando had a field day. In the preceding match, both Victoria Azarenka and Dinara Safina were hitting faster 2nd serves on the kph clock.

I think Murray has to up his game to be a slam winner. The match against Gonzalez was the norm and not the exception. In the Aussie Open match against Verdasco, after been two sets to one up, Murray handed the initiative to Fernando who obliged, realising Murray had no pace to his shots and was dropping the ball short often, allowing Verdasco to take over the match in the 4th and 5th sets – almost a lack of belief. It also happened in the US Open against Cilic. In the Wimbledon semifinal against Roddick, Murray said in the Press conference that it was close and could have gone either way. The reality was Roddick was mostly in control and Andy was playing catch up the whole match, Roddick was really taking advantage of Andy’s 72mph 2nd serve (as Jeff Tarango puts it).

I also feel Andy has a flawed belief in how to win slam tournaments. After Federer’s first service game in the 2008 US Open final, I concluded Murray would lose the match in 3 sets – Why? Because Murray was standing on the fence to return serve on a hard court, and all Federer had to do was keeping spinning the ball out wide to open up the court (which he did). Plus, Andy’s 2nd serve was so slow and short Federer was chipping and charging him all day (something Federer normally doesn’t perform). And after the match, Murray said that he didn’t serve well (true). He also said that if he serves at 70% first serves he will win.

Unfortunately for Murray when he misses his 1st serve he is in all kinds of bother, because his 2nd serve is so inadequate at slam level, he often wins well under 45% of 2nd serve points on his own serve. And at the slam level it’s not possible to win a slam with those figures.

Therefore I think Murray needs to change his attitude and mindset. I think Murray needs to work on his 2nd serve in the off season to get more depth, more pace and more slice which he could use to serve to the body or out wide as an alternative to slow topspin which lands in the middle of the box begging to be hit. Murray should concentrate on getting 60-65% 1st serves in because no one hits 75% first serves consistently in big matches when the pressure is on. That will force Andy to improve his 2nd serves because he needs to win at least 55% of his 2nd serve points in big matches.

I think Andy relies on his retrieval and defensive skills to much and is happy to hit the passing shot, but as Roddick showed at Wimbledon, its difficult to keep doing that under pressure, Murray wasn’t able to do it. Murray needs to take the offence more often by been prepared to come in behind strong ground strokes - as far as I can see he has good volleys. And he did this in 2008 US Open semifinal against Nadal.

Finally I wonder if Murray has a too friendly coaching set up? I know he has to feel comfortable with who he works with but is Miles McLaghan big enough to tell him that playing too defensive doesn’t win slam tournaments and he needs to develop an offensive game.

I wonder what you think of my assessment and Murray’s chances next year in the Major tournaments

FedFan_2007
11-14-2009, 07:40 PM
The ugly Scot has no chance to ever win a slam. Vamos!

Certinfy
11-14-2009, 07:43 PM
He'll win a slam :)

The_Beast
11-14-2009, 07:56 PM
Yeah,if he change his attitude it's very possible,other way i see him dropping to 5-th place in 2010.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 08:16 PM
Some hilarious criticisms. Criticising Murray's return of serve? Murray has his faults, but his return is not one of them. He's the best returner on tour. His lack of aggression is certainly worthy of criticism, but not his return.

Also, he's a far better player than Henman ever was. No ifs, ands, or buts.

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 08:22 PM
Some hilarious criticisms. Criticising Murray's return of serve? Murray has his faults, but his return is not one of them. He's the best returner on tour. His lack of aggression is certainly worthy of criticism, but not his return.

Also, he's a far better player than Henman ever was. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I'm not criticising his return of serve, I questioned his return of serve stance on a hardcourt against a superior server like Federer. That's in keeping with his mindset, which is too defensive and not prepared to take any risks whatsoever.

Thats not hilarious but actually an important observation.

By the way, what do you think Murray needs to do to improve next year?

Dini
11-14-2009, 08:25 PM
Murray might be the best Brit since Perry, but I still think that in general Henman is preferred because his game is more aesthetically pleasing, he was seen as the eternal underdog etc etc etc. :shrug:

Anyway, back on topic. Murray needs to stop playing like a chicken when he reaches the latter stages... to put it simply.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 08:31 PM
I'm not criticising his return of serve, I questioned his return of serve stance on a hardcourt against a superior server like Federer. That's in keeping with his mindset, which is too defensive and not prepared to take any risks whatsoever.

Thats not hilarious but actually an important observation.

By the way, what do you think Murray needs to do to improve next year?

That's how Murray has returned serve since the USO last year. You can't argue with his success on return. I don't think that was the problem against Federer that day. He had a bigger problem holding serve, not breaking serve.

As for how I think he can improve, I can only echo the comments of most other people. He needs to be more aggressive and he needs to find his 2008 forehand. Inexplicably, his forehand has regressed. It's much slower and shorter than it was in late 2008. He also needs to cut out the stupid mental lapses after he's won a set. I've lost count of how many times he has dropped serve after winning a set.

FiBeR
11-14-2009, 08:35 PM
only if predicted by Simon Reed

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 08:38 PM
That's how Murray has returned serve since the USO last year. You can't argue with his success on return. I don't think that was the problem against Federer that day. He had a bigger problem holding serve, not breaking serve.

As for how I think he can improve, I can only echo the comments of most other people. He needs to be more aggressive and he needs to find his 2008 forehand. Inexplicably, his forehand has regressed. It's much slower and shorter than it was in late 2008. He also needs to cut out the stupid mental lapses after he's won a set. I've lost count of how many times he has dropped serve after winning a set.

You can't have one without the other. If you feel you have no chance breaking serve then holding serve becomes more difficult - its all in the mind. And no one breaks serve by standing on the fence. Not sure about the success on return comment, Murray has lost all of his big matches in the 4 slams bar Warwrinka, and he almost came unstuck in that as well. Murray may return well against the top 30 players but he has to return better against the top 10 opponents in the big matches (i.e. slams not ATP events which are best of 3 sets)

Has Murray had any injuries or surgery on his right wrist?

Clydey
11-14-2009, 08:45 PM
You can't have one without the other. If you feel you have no chance breaking serve then holding serve becomes more difficult - its all in the mind. And no one breaks serve by standing on the fence. Not sure about the success on return comment, Murray has lost all of his big matches in the 4 slams bar Warwrinka, and he almost came unstuck in that as well. Murray may return well against the top 30 players but he has to return better against the top 10 opponents in the big matches (i.e. slams not ATP events which are best of 3 sets)

Has Murray had any injuries or surgery on his right wrist?

Murray is statistically the best first serve returner on tour. He is also statistically the 2nd best 2nd serve returner, 2nd best in terms of return games won, and 2nd best in terms of breakpoints converted. Only Rafael Nadal is ahead of him in those categories and Nadal's return stats get a boost from the clay court swing. Murray was ahead of everyone on all 4 return of serve categories this year until the clay court swing.

And yes, you can have one without the other. Karlovic is evidence of that. He can't return to save his life, but he holds serve more than anyone else on tour. Murray broke Federer's serve several times that day. The problem was that he kept getting broken because his serve is inconsistent and he allowed Federer to dictate and was too central with his groundstrokes. He didn't find Federer's backhand often enough.

No, he hasn't had surgery as far as I'm aware. Just an extended period of rest to allow the wrist to heal after he injured it in Hamburg 2007.

Burrow
11-14-2009, 08:53 PM
Henman played in a tougher era. Henman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Muggay :)

Lopez
11-14-2009, 08:53 PM
The problem with Murray's serve is that he hits the second serve and first serve with a very different technique. His first serve is based on pounding it flat, instead of serving with different spins (like Federer does). That creates a problem, since he has to drastically alter the shot on the second serve instead of just changing the spin and ball toss.

Del Potro is similar, he just gets away with it more since he's taller.

If Murray would change his serving mentality on first serve, I'm sure his second one would improve because it would just be an extension of a good first serve like it's supposed to be, instead of being a different shot altogether.

Arkulari
11-14-2009, 09:02 PM
Murray returns very very well, it's the key part of his game, but his serve is simply laughable in most stances, specially the second one
he doesn't put as much power in his strokes as he could due to his size and sometimes he plays way too passively, allowing the rival to set the pace, and that's a double edged sword

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 09:17 PM
The problem with Murray's serve is that he hits the second serve and first serve with a very different technique. His first serve is based on pounding it flat, instead of serving with different spins (like Federer does). That creates a problem, since he has to drastically alter the shot on the second serve instead of just changing the spin and ball toss.

Del Potro is similar, he just gets away with it more since he's taller.

If Murray would change his serving mentality on first serve, I'm sure his second one would improve because it would just be an extension of a good first serve like it's supposed to be, instead of being a different shot altogether.

Thats my interpretation about Murray's serve. I agree.

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 09:23 PM
Murray is statistically the best first serve returner on tour. He is also statistically the 2nd best 2nd serve returner, 2nd best in terms of return games won, and 2nd best in terms of breakpoints converted. Only Rafael Nadal is ahead of him in those categories and Nadal's return stats get a boost from the clay court swing. Murray was ahead of everyone on all 4 return of serve categories this year until the clay court swing.

And yes, you can have one without the other. Karlovic is evidence of that. He can't return to save his life, but he holds serve more than anyone else on tour. Murray broke Federer's serve several times that day. The problem was that he kept getting broken because his serve is inconsistent and he allowed Federer to dictate and was too central with his groundstrokes. He didn't find Federer's backhand often enough.

No, he hasn't had surgery as far as I'm aware. Just an extended period of rest to allow the wrist to heal after he injured it in Hamburg 2007.

Clydey, that's why I mentioned Murray's performance in Majors as opposed to ATP events. You want Andy to win a Major, not Paris Bercy right?

In that case using Karlovic as an example is a total waste of time because Karlovic will never get anywhere near a Major title simply because he can't return serve adequately.

Murray might have the best return record - but in the matches that matter, he is coming up short - that's not a statistical analysis from the ATP tour, that's a reality.

Murray needs to correct these things if wants any chance of defeating the top 5 players in the world next year where it really matters.

Again I stress, we are talking Grand Slam level, ATP tournament level.

leng jai
11-14-2009, 09:32 PM
Murray isn't even clearly superior to Henman, especially game wise. Murray has better a better mental game but you also need to take into account what players Henman had to contend with, particularly at Wimbledon.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 09:34 PM
Clydey, that's why I mentioned Murray's performance in Majors as opposed to ATP events. You want Andy to win a Major, not Paris Bercy right?

In that case using Karlovic as an example is a total waste of time because Karlovic will never get anywhere near a Major title simply because he can't return serve adequately.

Murray might have the best return record - but in the matches that matter, he is coming up short - that's not a statistical analysis from the ATP tour, that's a reality.

Murray needs to correct these things if wants any chance of defeating the top 5 players in the world next year where it really matters.

Again I stress, we are talking Grand Slam level, ATP tournament level.

It's not a reality at all. You aren't basing that on anything. It's Murray's ability to hold serve that's the problem. What planet are you living on that you think his return is the problem. Here's a prime example

The match with Roddick at Wimbledon. Murray broke Roddick twice in 4 sets. Federer couldn't break Roddick until the end of the 5th set, which ended up being something like Roddick's 35th service game, when he was tired. However, Federer was able to consistently hold serve. That was the difference. Murray breaks serve more than anyone else on a fast court at ANY level. His problem is holding serve.

Burrow
11-14-2009, 09:37 PM
Murray isn't even clearly superior to Henman, especially game wise. Murray has better a better mental game but you also need to take into account what players Henman had to contend with, particularly at Wimbledon.

ya

Tsonganator
11-14-2009, 09:38 PM
How much potential does Murray really have? Pace and depth of shot is a huge part of the game, its something tennis players work on their whole life, not something they decide to fix in the prime (or close to it) of their careers. Murray's forehand is easily the weakest of the top 10, and low down in the bottom 20, and even though his backhand is praised, he is still overly defensive with it, I'd take Djokovic's agression and placement anyday.

Ozone
11-14-2009, 09:38 PM
He has shown us, during the season that he was probably at the top of his game, that he can't beat the big guys. He will have to get better, which I don't know if he can get much better than this year, and he will have to hope for an Andy Roddick-like 2003 US Open luck draw.

Nole fan
11-14-2009, 09:46 PM
No one can deny that Murray will be a big player next two years. He's not going away.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 09:47 PM
No one can deny that Murray will be a big player next two years. He's not going away.

MTF members generally have a short memory. They only remember what has happened over the past week or two.

leng jai
11-14-2009, 09:48 PM
MTF members generally have a short memory. They only remember what has happened over the past week or two.

I remember the whole of 2009!

FedFan_2007
11-14-2009, 09:49 PM
Murray will continue to dominate ATP 250/500 events and win 2-3 Masters. But in the slams, it will be over and OUT!!!

Clydey
11-14-2009, 09:49 PM
I remember the whole of 2009!

You're a bit different, though. There's something special about you.

leng jai
11-14-2009, 09:50 PM
You're a bit different, though. There's something special about you.

I eat a lot of rice...

Clydey
11-14-2009, 09:51 PM
I eat a lot of rice...

And drive a rickshaw.

Vida
11-14-2009, 09:52 PM
I also am not convinced murray is a better player than henman.

leng jai
11-14-2009, 09:54 PM
And drive a rickshaw.

Of course, following in the footsteps of my ancestors.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 09:54 PM
I also am not convinced murray is a better player than henman.

He has won more titles by the age of 22 than Henman did in his entire career, has reached a major final, and has won 4 Masters titles to Henman's 1 Masters title.

The facts speak for themselves.

laurie-1
11-14-2009, 09:59 PM
It's not a reality at all. You aren't basing that on anything. It's Murray's ability to hold serve that's the problem. What planet are you living on that you think his return is the problem. Here's a prime example

The match with Roddick at Wimbledon. Murray broke Roddick twice in 4 sets. Federer couldn't break Roddick until the end of the 5th set, which ended up being something like Roddick's 35th service game, when he was tired. However, Federer was able to consistently hold serve. That was the difference. Murray breaks serve more than anyone else on a fast court at ANY level. His problem is holding serve.

I can see you are a huge fan of Andy Murray, after all you have a Scottish flag in your avatar.

While you are busy defending Murray to the hilt, he still has no Grand Slam title. There's a reason for that. Its ok if you don't want to see it - thats what fans usually do, not see the flaws in a player. That's all right.

Other posters who have contributed see the problems Murray has and what he needs to do to correct it if he wants to win a slam next year. So I will say it again for the last time - Murray needs to drastically improve his 2nd serve and also he needs to be more agressive when he returns serve against the very top players in the biggest matches when the pressure is on - not talking statistics and how often he breaks serve during the course of a season on the ATP tour.

Adios :wavey:

simplet
11-14-2009, 10:01 PM
That's how Murray has returned serve since the USO last year. You can't argue with his success on return. I don't think that was the problem against Federer that day. He had a bigger problem holding serve, not breaking serve.

As for how I think he can improve, I can only echo the comments of most other people. He needs to be more aggressive and he needs to find his 2008 forehand. Inexplicably, his forehand has regressed. It's much slower and shorter than it was in late 2008. He also needs to cut out the stupid mental lapses after he's won a set. I've lost count of how many times he has dropped serve after winning a set.

I don't think it's that surprising that his forehand is weaker than before. Simply I believe that by deciding to play so passively all the time, you lose some confidence and weight, even in your rally shots.

Just look at Monfils. You'll notice how sometimes Monfils has patches where he really rips his shots from both sides. Then he'll decide to change tactic and just pushes the ball back to frustrate his opponent or whatever the reason. When he does that you usually see his game deteriorate over time (usually his opponent's too to be fair), balls falling short, starting to sit up, etc... And when he tries to be aggressive again, his shots are all over the place. Basically he has put himself to sleep as well as the guy across the net and everyone else around.

Well Murray is doing the same, but instead of having patches, he's doing it all the time. His forehand being naturally his weaker shot, it suffers more from it. And Murray doesn't even have the luxury of bashing the ball mindlessly like Monfils when he has managed to frustrate himself, simply because he has no power, especially in his forehand.

Vida
11-14-2009, 10:02 PM
He has won more titles by the age of 22 than Henman did in his entire career, has reached a major final, and has won 4 Masters titles to Henman's 1 Masters title.

The facts speak for themselves.

ah, but not everything is in facts? its all relative.

as far as I recall, henman didnt have murray's self belief and often choked. but game-wise he was quite formidable. murray - with his offensive ineptitude - seems a bit 1-d compared to henman.

Buhweet
11-14-2009, 10:02 PM
Some hilarious criticisms. Criticising Murray's return of serve? Murray has his faults, but his return is not one of them. He's the best returner on tour. His lack of aggression is certainly worthy of criticism, but not his return.

Also, he's a far better player than Henman ever was. No ifs, ands, or buts.

Maybe YOU! should learn to read!!! That's not what the chick said. Honest, objective look at your boy upset you?
Andy is miles above Henmen, but what's that say for Andy? He-s better than an average tennis pusher? So Andy stands at about average for a pusher? Maybe that's all he's got?

Clydey
11-14-2009, 10:09 PM
Maybe YOU! should learn to read!!! That's not what the chick said. Honest, objective look at your boy upset you?
Andy is miles above Henmen, but what's that say for Andy? He-s better than an average tennis pusher? So Andy stands at about average for a pusher? Maybe that's all he's got?

An honest, objective look at anything is the last thing that's going to upset me. I'm simply responding to the ridiculous assertion that his return of serve is a problem. Murray has many flaws. His return is not one of them. Any sane person can see that it's perhaps his biggest strength.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 10:11 PM
I don't think it's that surprising that his forehand is weaker than before. Simply I believe that by deciding to play so passively all the time, you lose some confidence and weight, even in your rally shots.

Just look at Monfils. You'll notice how sometimes Monfils has patches where he really rips his shots from both sides. Then he'll decide to change tactic and just pushes the ball back to frustrate his opponent or whatever the reason. When he does that you usually see his game deteriorate over time (usually his opponent's too to be fair), balls falling short, starting to sit up, etc... And when he tries to be aggressive again, his shots are all over the place. Basically he has put himself to sleep as well as the guy across the net and everyone else around.

Well Murray is doing the same, but instead of having patches, he's doing it all the time. His forehand being naturally his weaker shot, it suffers more from it. And Murray doesn't even have the luxury of bashing the ball mindlessly like Monfils when he has managed to frustrate himself, simply because he has no power, especially in his forehand.

I agree with that. In fact, I mentioned it in one of the match threads. Murray has spent so much time being passive that when he tries to be aggressive he starts making errors. That in turn discourages him from being aggressive. It's something of a vicious circle.

Clydey
11-14-2009, 10:14 PM
ah, but not everything is in facts? its all relative.

as far as I recall, henman didnt have murray's self belief and often choked. but game-wise he was quite formidable. murray - with his offensive ineptitude - seems a bit 1-d compared to henman.

Being more aesthetically pleasing, in your opinion, does not make Henman better or even as good as Murray. You can overlook a few achievements here and there when comparing players. However, Murray has achieved far more by the age of 22 than Henman did in his entire career.

That's something you can't just gloss over.

TennisLurker
11-14-2009, 10:16 PM
Isn't Corretja Murray's coach?

Corretja is one of the few top players I can remember who had a forehand almost as bad as Murray's, the other is Ljubicic. He should get a forehand and second serve coach, the rest of his game is great.

I think Murray has 4 more good years in him, his game depends too much on his running and after the age of 25-26-27 most players lose half a step.
That means, 12 chances to win a slam because he will never win the French Open. He just has to clinch one, it is a shame he didn't win a slam the first two years of his prime.

Buhweet
11-14-2009, 10:25 PM
An honest, objective look at anything is the last thing that's going to upset me. I'm simply responding to the ridiculous assertion that his return of serve is a problem. Murray has many flaws. His return is not one of them. Any sane person can see that it's perhaps his biggest strength.

Problem with Andy is he ain't winning the big ones and if he continues as he is, will become the best choker the UK has ever produced. When the rest of the tour wake up to the psychological flaws in his game, which have become evident this season, he'll be relegated to the "could have been" great wish list the UK has presented us with over the past 65 years or more!

Clydey
11-14-2009, 10:29 PM
Problem with Andy is he ain't winning the big ones and if he continues as he is, will become the best choker the UK has ever produced. When the rest of the tour wake up to the psychological flaws in his game, which have become evident this season, he'll be relegated to the "could have been" great wish list the UK has presented us with over the past 65 years or more!

Everyone, including Murray, is aware that he is not doing it where it matters. It's not a case of him waking up to the problem. He must be acutely aware of the issue by now. He needs to find a way to solve whatever psychological problems are stopping him from getting it done at the majors.

Murray's Mint
11-14-2009, 10:42 PM
Sad to say, but I now rate Andy's chance of winning a slam lower than I did a year ago. His lack of power and defensive nature mean he will be vulnerable to players, particularly big hitters, who find a hot streak. I think the slams will be shared about a bit more though over the next few years so Andy will still get chances where the draw falls in his favour. I'm sure there will be some first time slam winners over the next couple of years and Andy has as much chance as anybody to be one of those.

malisha
11-14-2009, 11:55 PM
Murray will win a Slam even with this shitty game

but if he somehow finds his late 2008. form and groundstrokes he will win some more

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
11-15-2009, 12:13 AM
i agree with the OP in regards to Murray

he just lacks some firepower that some bulking up would bring

Murray is too thin, he needs some mass to have some real power in his shots

he is also too passive- i appreciate that alot of it probably comes from an overbearing mother who has made it her mission to make her son the worlds best, but someone has to do murray a favour and get him some personal space

standing so far back on a fast hardcourt??? thats just stupid, zero chance of winning

Henman was unlucky to be playing in an era of fast grass legends- his game was great, he was plucky and had heart, but just got outgunned by the big yanks- damn shame, Tim deserved a Wimby

Burrow
11-15-2009, 01:51 AM
in a non-nadal way of bulking up

in other words, since you didn't get my point- naturally getting bigger- no roids required

a bigger stronger murray would have the firepower to blast opponents off the court

As I've already said in another thread. Hypertrophy does not equal power nor strength.

Is Federer built like Jay Cutler? No and he had the greatest forehand of all time.

SetSampras
11-15-2009, 01:55 AM
2010 is another slamsless year for Murray. I wouldnt be surprised if he goes slamless his entire career. Honestly.. lets be frank he doesnt have a whole lot of weapons or firepower. Hes semi talented, but there are a few just as good or better than Murray still hanging around. But of course, when Fed retires or completely vanishes slam wise in the next few years, that will leave the slams open so of course there is a chance there for everyone. But Murray just isnt that great of player. Hes good but not a stand out great with this unlimted potential. I think hes a bit overrated.

Now if Djoker can get his head out of his ass and play in the slams like he has been recently here.. I can see him right in the hunt and grabbing some more.

FedFan_2007
11-15-2009, 01:57 AM
Murray will not win any slams with the big hitters around. If it isn't Cilic, then DelPo, Djokovic will take him out in slams :shrug:

Sunset of Age
11-15-2009, 02:02 AM
Muzza should just stop playing the pusher sh*te he's been doing lately. He surely has the game to manage very well indeed.

Dini
11-15-2009, 02:08 AM
Muzza should just stop playing the pusher sh*te he's been doing lately. He surely has the game to manage very well indeed.

:confused:

leng jai
11-15-2009, 02:10 AM
:confused:

By lately KarEn means his whole career.

Sunset of Age
11-15-2009, 02:13 AM
By lately KarEn means his whole career.

Not going to further elaborate on that. :angel:

Farenhajt
11-15-2009, 02:50 AM
About the only thing one can safely say is that Murray's top game has thus far been proven insufficient for a major title. And of course, no amount of McLagans and/or technical improvements can change the basic faults in Murray's brain functionality.

kengyin
11-15-2009, 02:55 AM
if nadal gets knee tendinitis again, federer gets glandular fever again, del potro gets another injury, djokovic succumbs to the heat again, and everyone else retires, then yes murray will win a slam

Clydey
11-15-2009, 04:49 AM
He doesn't need to gain muscle, power is generated from technique, not muscle. Besides, Murray has shown he has the firepower...he just doesn't/isn't confident enough to use it most of the time.

Precisely. It's not a case of "can't". It's a case of "won't".

And that's his biggest problem. He's terrified of making errors, it seems.

laurie-1
11-15-2009, 11:32 AM
Despite Clydey's bad behaviour and hurling of abuse, it seems the majority of contributors agree with the things I've pointed out in Murray's game and what he needs to improve next year to win a Major title.

Its not going to be easy for Andy Murray and the pressure from the British public at Wimbledon is enormous. Thats why Murray prefers the US Open. But I've never seen anyone win the US Open standing to receive serve at the backfence. Its the fastest hardcourt in the world and you realy need to take the ball early especially when receving the 2nd serve to put the pressure on your opponent.

Gustavo Kuerten was a very good hardcourt player getting to the final in Canada in 1997, Miami in 2000 (great match against Sampras) and the title in Cincinnat in 2001. But Kuerten never realised his potential at the US Open or on the rebound ace in Australia because he didn't take the ball early enough consistently enough and play up the court often enough to make the difference.

laurie-1
11-15-2009, 11:43 AM
2010 is another slamsless year for Murray. I wouldnt be surprised if he goes slamless his entire career. Honestly.. lets be frank he doesnt have a whole lot of weapons or firepower. Hes semi talented, but there are a few just as good or better than Murray still hanging around. But of course, when Fed retires or completely vanishes slam wise in the next few years, that will leave the slams open so of course there is a chance there for everyone. But Murray just isnt that great of player. Hes good but not a stand out great with this unlimted potential. I think hes a bit overrated.

Now if Djoker can get his head out of his ass and play in the slams like he has been recently here.. I can see him right in the hunt and grabbing some more.

Thats an interesting comment. You might remember in 2001 when Sampras started going downhill the media (well in Britain anyway) were saying this is Henman's big chance to win Wimbledon, he was 3 years younger than Sampras and so had about 4 more years to try and win it. Well Federer came up and put a stop to that.

So you never know who's going to come through so Murray really needs to win one as soon as possible before it becomes too much of a mental burden like it did for Tim.

I remember the 2002 Australian Open where after a few surprises the draw opened up for Henman and he had a clear run to the semis against non seed or lower ranked players. He met Bjorkman in the 4th rd who by that stage had become a doubles specialist. Well Henman was absolutely thrashed in 3 sets - it was embarrasing. I think that was the turning point where people started to realise that maybe Henman didn't have it at slam level.

So really 2010 will be a big year for Murray especially if the Joker maintains this type of form and Del Potro continues to improve and the likes of Tsonga stay free of injury and improve his game further. Plus Cilic looks a good prospect. Not to mention Nadal and Federer are still around.

Clydey
11-15-2009, 12:26 PM
Despite Clydey's bad behaviour and hurling of abuse, it seems the majority of contributors agree with the things I've pointed out in Murray's game and what he needs to improve next year to win a Major title.

Its not going to be easy for Andy Murray and the pressure from the British public at Wimbledon is enormous. Thats why Murray prefers the US Open. But I've never seen anyone win the US Open standing to receive serve at the backfence. Its the fastest hardcourt in the world and you realy need to take the ball early especially when receving the 2nd serve to put the pressure on your opponent.

Gustavo Kuerten was a very good hardcourt player getting to the final in Canada in 1997, Miami in 2000 (great match against Sampras) and the title in Cincinnat in 2001. But Kuerten never realised his potential at the US Open or on the rebound ace in Australia because he didn't take the ball early enough consistently enough and play up the court often enough to make the difference.

The only point I strongly disagreed with was what you said about his return. And no, I haven't seen anyone agree with you on that point.

You know nothing about his return game. Firstly, he takes a few steps in for the second serve. Secondly, he leaps forward before making contact on the return. He does not return from the back fence.

laurie-1
11-15-2009, 12:42 PM
Clydey

I know Murray steps in once the ball is coming (like cricketers do in the field once the bowler is about to bowl to cut down the angles).

However, his starting position is too far back, whether you like it or not and doesn't hit enough returns which gets the server on the backfoot.

By the way, I was going to joke last night that you would probably stay up until 5am checking to see what I've written. In fact, your last post before this was 5.49 am! Do you not get any sleep because you need the last word?

Its not good to spend so much time on a forum because you can start to lose touch with reality ;)

Anyway, whats the point of carrying this on. We'll agree to disagree. The proof will be in the puddding next year and we'll see what happens in the Slams - starting with the Australian Open. If Andy wins a slam its because he's made adjustments to his game which I've called for.

Anyway Clydey, have the last word because you can't survive without that, let's see next year :D

Clydey
11-15-2009, 12:49 PM
Clydey

I know Murray steps in once the ball is coming (like cricketers do in the field once the bowler is about to bowl to cut down the angles).

However, his starting position is too far back, whether you like it or not and doesn't hit enough returns which gets the server on the backfoot.

By the way, I was going to joke last night that you would probably stay up until 5am checking to see what I've written. In fact, your last post before this was 5.49 am! Do you not get any sleep because you need the last word?

Its not good to spend so much time on a forum because you can start to lose touch with reality ;)

Anyway, whats the point of carrying this on. We'll agree to disagree. The proof will be in the puddding next year and we'll see what happens in the Slams - starting with the Australian Open. If Andy wins a slam its because he's made adjustments to his game which I've called for.

Anyway Clydey, have the last word because you can't survive without that, let's see next year :D

I was watching the boxing. It finished in the very early hours, what with it being held in the USA. Is that alright?

Yes, Murray's return position is so poor that he wins more points returning first serve than anyone else on tour.

At least try and stay the course. Defend your position. I'm actually using facts to backup my views. What do you have, besides drawing attention to the fact that I was up late last night/early this morning?

What if Murray wins a slam and makes absolutely no adjustments to his return position? And that's something he will never alter. You don't change how you return when you are the best returner on tour.

Sophocles
11-15-2009, 02:53 PM
It's perfectly possible to win slams with a defensive game. Borg, Wilander, Chang, Hewitt, arguably Nadal. But the multiple slam winners among them did adapt & spice up their games according to the opponent and the surface, to make sure more aggressive players couldn't take the initiative on every point. This is what Murray has so far failed to do in the slams, even though technically he seems more than capable of doing it.

Orka_n
11-15-2009, 04:25 PM
I don't believe Murray will win a slam in 2010, and certainly not if he doesn't somehow change style and become more aggressive. But that's about as likely as Nadal stopping his buttpicking.

Ichiban1920
11-15-2009, 07:10 PM
Murray will never win a slam.

EVER.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
11-15-2009, 07:43 PM
He doesn't need to gain muscle, power is generated from technique, not muscle. Besides, Murray has shown he has the firepower...he just doesn't/isn't confident enough to use it most of the time.

As I've already said in another thread. Hypertrophy does not equal power nor strength.

Is Federer built like Jay Cutler? No and he had the greatest forehand of all time.

if this were true then why aren't women able to hit the ball as hard as men?

you can't honestly say that every woman doesn't have technique- no, its because women aren't built as strong as men

of course the williams sisters have little technique and Henin has excellent technique but in general the women's game proves the point

bigger stronger athletes dominate the smaller ones

and part of that is bulking up

here's another example- Nadal's topspin, generated by his huge muscular arms

for all of Federer's technique he can only generate 4000 RPM

Nadal with inferior technique generates 5000 RPM

Goldenoldie
11-15-2009, 08:03 PM
Here's my prediction for 2010. Murray will lose more and more matches to attacking players, and will have a poor set of results, dropping out of the top 10 and failing to make the WTF.

He will then realise there is something wrong, change his coach at the end of 2010, change his game plan, and win AO in 2011, followed by a final at Wimbledon and a second slam at USO.

Burrow
11-15-2009, 08:26 PM
if this were true then why aren't women able to hit the ball as hard as men?

you can't honestly say that every woman doesn't have technique- no, its because women aren't built as strong as men

of course the williams sisters have little technique and Henin has excellent technique but in general the women's game proves the point

bigger stronger athletes dominate the smaller ones

and part of that is bulking up

here's another example- Nadal's topspin, generated by his huge muscular arms

for all of Federer's technique he can only generate 4000 RPM

Nadal with inferior technique generates 5000 RPM

oh lord, this is partly my area of study and oh lord... :o

Radalek
11-15-2009, 08:51 PM
AO 2010 will be huge for him, almost all or nothing there.
If he fails there RG will follow (no chances there) and Wimbledon with enormous pressure on him like we saw this year. Then he may came into USO 2010 with another slamless year looming over him and with guys like Roger, Delpo and Novak waiting.
Going to 2011 and being already 24 then will make his task only harder and harder. So AO 2010 might be his career defining slam.

Johnny Groove
11-15-2009, 09:02 PM
He needs to step up and be aggressive, especially with his forehand.

His 2nd serve needs major work, too.

That, and a little luck, and I think he has a shot at 3/4 slams next year.

Corey Feldman
11-15-2009, 09:38 PM
he should poach Stefanki away from Roddick and fire the team he has, and bring in Henman as well in some role

simplet
11-15-2009, 09:48 PM
Precisely. It's not a case of "can't". It's a case of "won't".

And that's his biggest problem. He's terrified of making errors, it seems.

I dunno about that... He can create some pace if he takes the ball early and lean into it, but mostly he hits winners (when he does) because of placement. I don't think I've ever seen him wait for a ball to bounce and start to go down, and then take a huge cut at it ŗ la Gonzalez from behind the baseline. I honestly don't think he can create winners or close to it from that kind of position.

leng jai
11-16-2009, 05:48 AM
I dunno about that... He can create some pace if he takes the ball early and lean into it, but mostly he hits winners (when he does) because of placement. I don't think I've ever seen him wait for a ball to bounce and start to go down, and then take a huge cut at it ŗ la Gonzalez from behind the baseline. I honestly don't think he can create winners or close to it from that kind of position.

To be fair thats not the style of player that Murray needs to employ. Hes never going to be the James Flake type of pounding forehands as hard as he can from two metres behind the baseline. What he needs is measured aggression at the appropriate time. His current style of play is far too reactive which means he ends up missing too many opportunities to attack, most from within three quarter court.

3c273
11-16-2009, 11:56 AM
Thats why Murray prefers the US Open. But I've never seen anyone win the US Open standing to receive serve at the backfence

Just to point out something obviously wrong :
1: Murray never stand at backfence receiving serve, never once!
2: He usually stands half way betweet baseline and backfence receiving first serve, and ALWAYS steps up several feet.
3:When receiving second serve, he'll move furthur close to baseline, sometime within baseline

By the way, Murray has his problems (including receiving serve) and strengths, but receiveing serve certainly is not a weakness of his game, even may be his biggest strength .

zcess81
11-16-2009, 12:23 PM
Murray's major weaknesses:

Weak forehand
Lack of agression
Weak 2nd serve
Loss of concentration when he's winning the match


What he needs to do is practice being more and more agressive...and he needs to do that in matches/against opponents he's easily beating. No point trying to just decide to be more agressive in slam semi/final against Fed/Nadal (in form)...it won't work. To get that agression in his mindset he needs to do it against lesser opposition, against whom Murray's regular defensive game would be more than enough. If he wants to be more agressive he needs to do it in ALL his matches. You can't just decide to be agressive in 1 match when defense isn't working. That will, more ofthen than not, not work. I understand his refusal to change. Nobody likes to change, everyone wants to play in their comfort zone, but by now I'm sure he knows that his usual pusher game will not work in slams. Even if he gets a lucky draw and manages to get 1 slam in his career with his defensive game...that will be it. Is Murray happy winning MAYBE 1 slam with his current pusher game when he could win 3-4 in his career with more agression? Only he knows that.

He needs to look at Nadal who was initially just a defensive pusher like Murray. Nadal knew he HAD to improve his game / become more agressive if had any chance of success on hard courts. He did just that and consequently he has AO title and a few HC masters.

Murray's current gameplan is to simply play defensive tennis until it doesn't work, then he tries to switch to agressive tennis and starts making UE/losing confidence. He seems to think that he can just "turn on" agression when he wants and that's just not the case. You do it little by little in each and every game until it becomes natural.

If he starts working on that now it may take time, maybe more than a year, for this to happen. But Murray is a stubborn man and I'm sure he believes that his way is the right way, so it wouldn't surprise me if he continues his defensive gameplan for some time to come.

3c273
11-16-2009, 12:42 PM
Murray's major weaknesses:

Weak forehand
Lack of agression
Weak 2nd serve
Loss of concentration when he's winning the match


What he needs to do is practice being more and more agressive...and he needs to do that in matches/against opponents he's easily beating. No point trying to just decide to be more agressive in slam semi/final against Fed/Nadal (in form)...it won't work. To get that agression in his mindset he needs to do it against lesser opposition, against whom Murray's regular defensive game would be more than enough. If he wants to be more agressive he needs to do it in ALL his matches. You can't just decide to be agressive in 1 match when defense isn't working. That will, more ofthen than not, not work. I understand his refusal to change. Nobody likes to change, everyone wants to play in their comfort zone, but by now I'm sure he knows that his usual pusher game will not work in slams. Even if he gets a lucky draw and manages to get 1 slam in his career with his defensive game...that will be it. Is Murray happy winning MAYBE 1 slam with his current pusher game when he could win 3-4 in his career with more agression? Only he knows that.

He needs to look at Nadal who was initially just a defensive pusher like Murray. Nadal knew he HAD to improve his game / become more agressive if had any chance of success on hard courts. He did just that and consequently he has AO title and a few HC masters.

Murray's current gameplan is to simply play defensive tennis until it doesn't work, then he tries to switch to agressive tennis and starts making UE/losing confidence. He seems to think that he can just "turn on" agression when he wants and that's just not the case. You do it little by little in each and every game until it becomes natural.

If he starts working on that now it may take time, maybe more than a year, for this to happen. But Murray is a stubborn man and I'm sure he believes that his way is the right way, so it wouldn't surprise me if he continues his defensive gameplan for some time to come.

Eactly ! well said, Murray needs to hone his aggressive game with easy opponent.

Bernard Black
11-16-2009, 02:53 PM
Can't believe the number of people here who can write Murray off so quickly.

He was recently number 2 in the world, reached a slam final just over a year ago and has consistently won titles beating the best in the process. Fair enough, the latter point can be put down to Murray being a flat track bully - can't argue with that. I know I'll be flamed for this, but I honestly think Murray has been extremely unlucky in slams, most often running into a red hot opponent who relentlessly pounds on him. How many times have we seen Federer in this position in the past few years, only for his opponent to crumble from a winning position? Murray just doesn't get those kind of breaks.

Technically speaking, I do agree with the majority though that his forehand and second serve need improvement. He seems content on dumping forehands in play when we know he can hit through the ball, I honestly can't fathom this gameplan and it means he's almost constantly retrieving in rallies, which feeds an in-form opponent with confidence. The second serve is heavily spun and gets the job done against lesser opponents, but we've seen if an opponent is playing well enough they can use the kick to flatten out the return consistently and put Murray on the back foot.

As I said, it's not all doom and gloom though. When the first serve is on Murray can fly through service games, the key is maintaining a high percentage obviously - perhaps take a few mph off those flat serves? The backhand is solid, and forehand passing shot one of the best in the world. Murray can volley too, I'd love to see him use his net game more often, not necessarily serve and volley but the backhand slice approach I think would pay dividends because Murray possesses skills at the net. Del Potro showed at the U.S. Open even a player with mediocre volleys can win a heap of points at the net if the approach shot is good enough.

zcess81
11-16-2009, 03:18 PM
Can't believe the number of people here who can write Murray off so quickly.

He was recently number 2 in the world, reached a slam final just over a year ago and has consistently won titles beating the best in the process. Fair enough, the latter point can be put down to Murray being a flat track bully - can't argue with that. I know I'll be flamed for this, but I honestly think Murray has been extremely unlucky in slams, most often running into a red hot opponent who relentlessly pounds on him. How many times have we seen Federer in this position in the past few years, only for his opponent to crumble from a winning position? Murray just doesn't get those kind of breaks.

Technically speaking, I do agree with the majority though that his forehand and second serve need improvement. He seems content on dumping forehands in play when we know he can hit through the ball, I honestly can't fathom this gameplan and it means he's almost constantly retrieving in rallies, which feeds an in-form opponent with confidence. The second serve is heavily spun and gets the job done against lesser opponents, but we've seen if an opponent is playing well enough they can use the kick to flatten out the return consistently and put Murray on the back foot.

As I said, it's not all doom and gloom though. When the first serve is on Murray can fly through service games, the key is maintaining a high percentage obviously - perhaps take a few mph off those flat serves? The backhand is solid, and forehand passing shot one of the best in the world. Murray can volley too, I'd love to see him use his net game more often, not necessarily serve and volley but the backhand slice approach I think would pay dividends because Murray possesses skills at the net. Del Potro showed at the U.S. Open even a player with mediocre volleys can win a heap of points at the net if the approach shot is good enough.


"Murray has been extremely unlucky in slams, most often running into a red hot opponent who relentlessly pounds on him."

:bs: Failing to do it 1 time maybe attributed to bad luck, but so far, this year in slams, EVERY TIME he's been knocked out by players outside top 3...AO-Verdasco, French-Gonzalez, Wimbledon-Roddick, USO-Cilic. How was he unlucky? Every time he loses there seems to be same old illness/injury excuse. I'm sorry but this is getting OLD. If he cannot beat the players outside top 3 how in the hell is he going to beat inform top 3 in semis/finals?

By the way, why do you think these "red hot opponents" pound him every time? It's because of his passive gameplan! He makes it way to easy for them, gives them rhythm and ALLOWS them to play THEIR GAME. I don't care how fast Murray is, tennis ball is/always will be faster, so good attacking player will more ofthen than not POUND HIM. On the other hand, had he been more aggressive in those matches he would have thrown most of those opponents off their rhythm...and then THEY WOULD BE forced to change THEIR gameplan, and UE would start creep in. One thing that was apparent in those matches was Murray's refusal to change his tactics. He just kept retrieving, hoping that the opponent would miss. He wasn't unlucky, he was just being incredibly stubborn/stupid.

Commander Data
11-16-2009, 03:25 PM
Murray has not a technical problem, he has a mental problem.

rhinooooo
11-16-2009, 03:33 PM
To be fair thats not the style of player that Murray needs to employ. Hes never going to be the James Flake type of pounding forehands as hard as he can from two metres behind the baseline. What he needs is measured aggression at the appropriate time. His current style of play is far too reactive which means he ends up missing too many opportunities to attack, most from within three quarter court.

Exactly. Murray has the amazing ability of turning a slightly positive or neutral rally into a negative grinding one.

I really think he's been a joke to watch this year.

Bernard Black
11-16-2009, 03:34 PM
"Murray has been extremely unlucky in slams, most often running into a red hot opponent who relentlessly pounds on him."

:bs: Failing to do it 1 time maybe attributed to bad luck, but so far, this year in slams, EVERY TIME he's been knocked out by players outside top 3...AO-Verdasco, French-Gonzalez, Wimbledon-Roddick, USO-Cilic. How was he unlucky? Every time he loses there seems to be same old illness/injury excuse. I'm sorry but this is getting OLD. If he cannot beat the players outside top 3 how in the hell is he going to beat inform top 3 in semis/finals?

By the way, why do you think these "red hot opponents" pound him every time? It's because of his passive gameplan! He makes it way to easy for them, gives them rhythm and ALLOWS them to play THEIR GAME. I don't care how fast Murray is, tennis ball is/always will be faster, so good attacking player will more ofthen than not POUND HIM. On the other hand, had he been more aggressive in those matches he would have thrown most of those opponents off their rhythm...and then THEY WOULD BE forced to change THEIR gameplan, and UE would start creep in. One thing that was apparent in those matches was Murray's refusal to change his tactics. He just kept retrieving, hoping that the opponent would miss. He wasn't unlucky, he was just being incredibly stubborn/stupid.

Hehe, I did pre-empt your flame-throwing if you look back :p

Good point that Murray needs a Plan B in instances where he's getting wiped off the court. He does need to be more aggressive, but I can't see how he can shake off his defensive tendancies overnight, as much as it pains me to say that.

With all this being said, MacLagan is probably waxing lyrical about this very point and imploring Murray to attack more, I can't imagine he's telling the Scot to "be as defensive as you can - try to draw errors from your opponent". He's more likely pointing out exactly what we've said a thousand times. As we know though, drawing up a gameplan in practice is much different to executing it on court, and perhaps the problems are mental more than anything. In which case, I'm not sure how he can overcome them. It's silly to rule him out of winning a slam on this basis though (take Ivanisevic for example), it just means he's unlikely to win a hatful.

zcess81
11-16-2009, 03:38 PM
Hehe, I did pre-empt your flame-throwing if you look back :p

Good point that Murray needs a Plan B in instances where he's getting wiped off the court. He does need to be more aggressive, but I can't see how he can shake off his defensive tendancies overnight, as much as it pains me to say that.

With all this being said, MacLagan is probably waxing lyrical about this very point and imploring Murray to attack more, I can't imagine he's telling the Scot to "be as defensive as you can - try to draw errors from your opponent". He's more likely pointing out exactly what we've said a thousand times. As we know though, drawing up a gameplan in practice is much different to executing it on court, and perhaps the problems are mental more than anything. In which case, I'm not sure how he can overcome them. It's silly to rule him out of winning a slam on this basis though (take Ivanisevic for example), it just means he's unlikely to win a hatful.


No falame-throwing, I'm just pointing out what to me is pretty obvious flaw in his game.

That's what I said in my previous post...


What he needs to do is practice being more and more agressive...and he needs to do that in matches/against opponents he's easily beating. No point trying to just decide to be more agressive in slam semi/final against Fed/Nadal (in form)...it won't work. To get that agression in his mindset he needs to do it against lesser opposition, against whom Murray's regular defensive game would be more than enough. If he wants to be more agressive he needs to do it in ALL his matches. You can't just decide to be agressive in 1 match when defense isn't working. That will, more ofthen than not, not work. I understand his refusal to change. Nobody likes to change, everyone wants to play in their comfort zone, but by now I'm sure he knows that his usual pusher game will not work in slams. Even if he gets a lucky draw and manages to get 1 slam in his career with his defensive game...that will be it. Is Murray happy winning MAYBE 1 slam with his current pusher game when he could win 3-4 in his career with more agression? Only he knows that.
He needs to look at Nadal who was initially just a defensive pusher like Murray. Nadal knew he HAD to improve his game / become more agressive if had any chance of success on hard courts. He did just that and consequently he has AO title and a few HC masters.

Murray's current gameplan is to simply play defensive tennis until it doesn't work, then he tries to switch to agressive tennis and starts making UE/losing confidence. He seems to think that he can just "turn on" agression when he wants and that's just not the case. You do it little by little in each and every game until it becomes natural.

If he starts working on that now it may take time, maybe more than a year, for this to happen. But Murray is a stubborn man and I'm sure he believes that his way is the right way, so it wouldn't surprise me if he continues his defensive gameplan for some time to come.

Florida
11-16-2009, 06:00 PM
Murray, Murray..... He better do well next year, or the Brits will go into a frenzy... He should might as well play for the US and think he will get the better support, coaches.... Even though I don't respect and care much for his play, I feel for the guy. Being Scot and a Brit pigeon is not easy.... He will never please those idiots...... Because even if he wins a slam, which I am sure he will, he will still not be appreciated........I hope for his sake he wins the WTF next week, just to end the year on a good note......

Filo V.
11-16-2009, 06:18 PM
I think Murray will either win AO next year, where it is really up for grabs, or he isn't winning a GS. Maybe, just maybe Wimbledon, but grass isn't quite as good for his counter punch game.

Murray has a weak second serve, it doesn't have much if any bite to it, and as is said a lot, you are only as good as your second serve. Second serve stats really show a lot, in who is serving better, being more aggressive, and the one in control of the game. Murray needs to improve his second serve by a lot, or improve his first serve percentage in order to beat the best of the best at a GS, because it will be eaten alive by a hard hitting consistent returner.

Also that forehand, it seems needs time to set up and hit it clean, he can take it early but he isn't too confident in doing so, and he hits it bad a lot when he does. Seeing him hitting clean winner forehands against Nadal at the US Open last year was amazing to watch but he needs to step up in the court in an aggressive way more consistently. Playing not to make errors and not going out and taking the match in his hands is something he needs to address mentally.


All in all, Murray doesn't really have the style or mentality to be a big hitter like a Del Porto or Cilic or Gonzalez, but his combo of speed, explosion, consistency, variety and pinpoint control w/some power is great to watch when he is on, and he can win against most on these traits alone. However, he won't win a major until he fixes up some major deficiencies in his game, mentally, emotionally and tactically. Because at the end of the day, an aggressive player at their best>a defensive player at their best.

Vida
11-17-2009, 07:11 PM
lets hear it from man himself... mind games or what? interesting comparison with sampras agassi match up.

Andy Murray isn't a worry for Roger Federer: World No 1 dismisses Scot's threat ahead of Barclays ATP Tour World Finals
...
Federer concedes Murray can cause him problems with his relentless counter-punching. The world No 1 said: ĎMurray can still do that to some degree, but when I play too good or too offensive I can take it away from him now. And Iím too physical, whereas in the beginning I couldnít do that. I couldnít get around backhands and stuff. Now I can mix up my game too well for him to get under my skin.
ĎWhen we both play well itís a close match, but I always feel itís the attacker who holds the key to success, so itís up to me whether I win or lose, not up to him. Thatís why I donít mind the match-up, to be honest.
ĎItís like when Sampras and Agassi played. Sampras holds the keys because he was serving, he was pushing the limits, he was taking the risks. Which Murray doesnít do so much, though that doesnít take anything away from Murray. Thatís just his game style.í
In this morningís draw, taking place in a pod of the London Eye, they will discover whether it is a case of if or when they meet next week.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1228693/Andy-Murray-isnt-worry-Roger-Federer-World-No-1-dismisses-Scots-threat-ahead-Barclays-ATP-Tour-World-Finals.html

habibko
11-17-2009, 10:28 PM
lets hear it from man himself... mind games or what? interesting comparison with sampras agassi match up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1228693/Andy-Murray-isnt-worry-Roger-Federer-World-No-1-dismisses-Scots-threat-ahead-Barclays-ATP-Tour-World-Finals.html

well said by Fed, I like his mentality regarding this particular match up, it's the right one :yeah: and he has shown how true it is in USO final and Cincy SF this year.

and Murray needs alot of luck and things going his way in order to win a slam next year.

DrJules
11-17-2009, 10:33 PM
Nadal considers him a serious contender to win a big title:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17112009/58/nadal-backs-murray-grand-slam-win.html

MrChopin
11-17-2009, 11:54 PM
Nadal considers him a serious contender to win a big title:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17112009/58/nadal-backs-murray-grand-slam-win.html

Nadal considers Gulbis a serious threat for WTF '09.

Midnight Ninja
11-18-2009, 12:12 AM
lets hear it from man himself... mind games or what? interesting comparison with sampras agassi match up.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1228693/Andy-Murray-isnt-worry-Roger-Federer-World-No-1-dismisses-Scots-threat-ahead-Barclays-ATP-Tour-World-Finals.html

I really want to see what Murray has to say after this. Wimbledon drama still reels in my mind.

tennizen
11-18-2009, 12:20 AM
lets hear it from man himself... mind games or what? interesting comparison with sampras agassi match up.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1228693/Andy-Murray-isnt-worry-Roger-Federer-World-No-1-dismisses-Scots-threat-ahead-Barclays-ATP-Tour-World-Finals.html

That's a very bold statement from Fed. Let's see if he can back it up.

recessional
11-18-2009, 12:58 AM
federer also said this about murray:

"Everybody has his own game and you can't change the way you play. It's just something you're born with. He comes to the net more, for instance, than other players. I think if you look closely, every player needs to have something aggressive in his game to play well. If you want to be a top player you need to have offensive skills."

Is he surprised that, at 22, Murray has not yet won his first Grand Slam title? "How old was I?" says Federer. He was 21. "I'm not that surprised. How many serious chances has he had to win a Slam now? Maybe six, when he's been a real contender? Before that it would have been a bit of a surprise.

"It's not that easy. I was favourite to win the French Open in 2003 and I lost in the first round in straight sets. He's done better than I did! Of course I never expected to be as dominant or as good after that, but sometimes you just have to wait and see. But at the same time he's come close a couple of times. He made the final against me [at the 2008 US Open] and the semi-finals at Wimbledon, and was able to handle the pressure there. I think he's not far off."

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/doubles-game-federer--my-life-with-the-twins-1822316.html

Sunset of Age
11-18-2009, 01:00 AM
^ yeah, let's all start bashing the guy once again for stating the obvious. ;) :worship:

Dini
11-18-2009, 01:36 AM
Dailymail. :worship: Tabloids don't get any trashier than that. They were also the toilet paper newspaper that twisted Fed's pre-Wimbledon words. But yeah Fed's stating the obvious there. :shrug: Don't think it's mind games or anything like that. It's common sense that the more attacking/aggressive player has more control over his destiny than that person who doesn't.

fast_clay
11-18-2009, 03:00 AM
contrary to what a few are saying, that, murray is further away from a slam than this time last year... i would probably argue that murray will enjoy not being one of the top two faves heading into the year... i think with del potro winning the us and an extra GS champ in the mix will serve a 'hunting-the-pack' mentality better... and should he win a slam, i dont see him having an immediate post win let down like del potro (not that dp will suffer any because of this) because i think you can see murray feels and knows he is ready and belongs there...

i know this is a technical discussion as well... but, i think his grand slam tactics might need a rethink, as some have mentioned, more in the early rounds than in the crunch match where he doesnt seem to be able to summon that change of gear that he has, on occasion, displayed in the past... that means, executing a few different game plans in the early rounds... not using them just as grind sessions, but getting creative and comfortable using the match arsenal that he has... you could see federer this year as early as cincinatti just getting off to electric starts (also similar to pre USO '07), he was practicing that in the lead up and carried it in to the US Open rounds, right up until the final, whereupon he had a monumental brain melt and veered from a gameplan which seemed a sure bet...

murray's not dumb, and i think they'll address a few things once the seaon is over... for sure the season ending finals are big for him and should he win it it'll go some way to showing the public he can deal with home crowd expectation and come up trumps...

also tactically, the poster who said he should vary the pace of the first serve made a good call... practice popping 75%pace firsts in makes a higher % 1st serves in, and he can use the ball behind the serve more to boss points instead of exclusively playing the full pace cannon and exposing his second serve on off days where his 1st serve % is poor... ironically, when his 1st serve % is up, his second serve doesnt usually end up being powder puffed in, so in all its a basic and very sound tactic to adopt... it is this 2 shot combination (high %, 3/4 pace 1st serve + heavy 2nd shot) is a play that nadal rarely gets credit for...

orangehat
11-18-2009, 04:43 AM
I was wondering why Sapeod hasn't commented on this thread, only to find that he's been permanently banned :haha:.

Basically, Murray needs to get a 2nd serve, stop playing 3 metres behind the baseline, and have a plan B. I like how Djokovic always seems to change his game plan halfway through the match (more backhand slices, drop shots even though sometimes he plays them so badly :o) when he realises what he's doing isn't winning him the points. Murray never ever does that. He could also S&V more a bit more than what he's doing currently.

djb84xi
11-18-2009, 08:21 PM
I think Murray has a shot to maybe win Australia or in New York, but definitely not Paris or Wimbledon. He's worked really hard and done well to get as far as he has, but if he's wants to get to the next level, he really has to turn his game from defensive to offensive. If he doesn't, he will be in the same boat as Nadal, finding himself in serious trouble against the rest of the top players. I have confidence that Andy will become a more offensive player, and perhaps win a slam, in due time.

I hope his career doesn't end the same way Tim Henman's did..............without a slam!!! That would be bad!

tennishero
11-18-2009, 08:34 PM
no need to post pictures after every post, specially hideous ones as such ^

Burrow
11-18-2009, 10:12 PM
He's rubbish. Hope he never wins.

Clydey
11-18-2009, 10:14 PM
He's rubbish. Hope he never wins.

Thanks for that in-depth analysis of the Murray game. We now have much to ponder.

guga2120
11-18-2009, 10:36 PM
I think he will win a slam in 2010, just not Wimbledon. There is too much put on him there. If he plays his best, he can beat anybody on a given day, especially the arrogant Swiss.

Andy Murray is the best player to come out of Britain since Tim Henman. In some ways Murray is better than Henman


Murray has already surpassed Tim Henman.

tennishero
11-18-2009, 11:16 PM
his best chance will come at USO again, if he doesnt win next year then he may never win a slam...

RafitoGoat
11-18-2009, 11:27 PM
Murray doesn't have the talent and grit of Federer/Nadal/Del Potro/Djokovic. btw Djokovic's talent is underrated, just because he doesn't vary his attack it doesn't mean he has less talent than Murray. Djokovic's flat-hitting a-game is more dangerous than anything Murray has. There is a good chance Murray will not win a slam, because most of the top guns are his age and there will be new guns entering in a couple of years :(

djb84xi
11-19-2009, 01:15 AM
I think he will win a slam in 2010, just not Wimbledon. There is too much put on him there. If he plays his best, he can beat anybody on a given day, especially the arrogant Swiss.



Murray has already surpassed Tim Henman.

That he has done already. Hopefully he'll be able to do what Henman couldn't. I believe he can.

djb84xi
11-19-2009, 01:16 AM
I was wondering why Sapeod hasn't commented on this thread, only to find that he's been permanently banned :haha:.

Basically, Murray needs to get a 2nd serve, stop playing 3 metres behind the baseline, and have a plan B. I like how Djokovic always seems to change his game plan halfway through the match (more backhand slices, drop shots even though sometimes he plays them so badly :o) when he realises what he's doing isn't winning him the points. Murray never ever does that. He could also S&V more a bit more than what he's doing currently.

This same exact theory could be applied to a couple of other top players, especially Nadal.

ForehandWinner
11-19-2009, 01:52 AM
He has one enemy! Press. They will freakin pressure him and make him lose. Good enough.

laurie-1
11-24-2009, 11:59 PM
I've just got back from the O2 arena after watching Federer v Murray. Very good match, great atmosphere - Federer really had a lot of fans in the stadium. Federer picked up his game nicely in the 2nd set, running around his backhand to hit forehand returns, chipping and charging at key moments (like in the 2008 US Open final), I was really impressed with his willingness to change tactics because in the 1st set I thought Federer stayed back too much and wasn't forcing the issue, literally floating every 2nd serve return and lost the set.

At the same time, I was very disappointed with Murray again. As far as I can see, nothing has changed since I last saw Murray in Paris in June when he lost (got smashed actually!) to Gonzalez in the French Open quarterfinal. In the 2nd set, Andy was just playing way too passive, allowing Federer to take the intiative. I went with two friends and I said to them early in the 2nd set that if Murray continues to play that way he will lose the match, and that's exactly what happened. Early in the 2nd set, Federer did a chip and charge play and lost the point. I immediately turned to my friend and said that Federer is smart because he will do it again when he has a break point and the pressure was on Murray to pass, he was putting a marker down. Sure enough, later in the set, 2nd serve, Federer chipped and charged, weak passing attempt by Murray and Federer got the break.

Andy just wasn't brave enough to take the net off short balls, and seems totaly inacapable of hitting winners from the back court. By the 3rd set Andy was hoping for Federer errors but they never materialized and Andy didn't seem to have an answer in the end and was well beaten. I was really shouting for Andy but in the end that wasn't much to shout about.

I still question Murray's tactics and choices against the very best players in the most pressured situations.

Murray simply needs to start playing more aggressive and take the game to his opponent more often.

habibko
11-25-2009, 12:08 AM
I've just got back from the O2 arena after watching Federer v Murray. Very good match, great atmosphere - Federer really had a lot of fans in the stadium. Federer picked up his game nicely in the 2nd set, running around his backhand to hit forehand returns, chipping and charging at key moments (like in the 2008 US Open final), I was really impressed with his willingness to change tactics because in the 1st set I thought Federer stayed back too much and wasn't forcing the issue, literally floating every 2nd serve return and lost the set.

At the same time, I was very disappointed with Murray again. As far as I can see, nothing has changed since I last saw Murray in Paris in June when he lost (got smashed actually!) to Gonzalez in the French Open quarterfinal. In the 2nd set, Andy was just playing way too passive, allowing Federer to take the intiative. I went with two friends and I said to them early in the 2nd set that if Murray continues to play that way he will lose the match, and that's exactly what happened. Early in the 2nd set, Federer did a chip and charge play and lost the point. I immediately turned to my friend and said that Federer is smart because he will do it again when he has a break point and the pressure was on Murray to pass, he was putting a marker down. Sure enough, later in the set, 2nd serve, Federer chipped and charged, weak passing attempt by Murray and Federer got the break.

Andy just wasn't brave enough to take the net off short balls, and seems totaly inacapable of hitting winners from the back court. By the 3rd set Andy was hoping for Federer errors but they never materialized and Andy didn't seem to have an answer in the end and was well beaten. I was really shouting for Andy but in the end that wasn't much to shout about.

I still question Murray's tactics and choices against the very best players in the most pressured situations.

Murray simply needs to start playing more aggressive and take the game to his opponent more often.

well said and analyzed :yeah:

rocketassist
11-25-2009, 12:10 AM
That he has done already. Hopefully he'll be able to do what Henman couldn't. I believe he can.

Henman's TMS was a far more impressive one than any of Muzza's.

Byrd
11-25-2009, 12:20 AM
From what I've seen, the following areas have room for improvement:

1.1st serve % is too low, needs to improve on this.
2.2nd serve is too attackable i.e lack of weight and alot of the time in the middle of the court
3.Forehand is a liability, but only really gets exposed on clay due to lack of weight of shot
4.His lack of willingness to be aggressive at the right times can cost him points and ultimately the match.

Bernard Black
11-25-2009, 09:53 AM
Murray needs to work a LOT on hitting down the line in the off-season. He seems to have lost all confidence in his backhand down the line which used to be his signature shot, and he hardly ever hits an aggressive forehand down the line.

The typical Murray rally is he'll trade forehands cross-court everytime until his opponent hits one down the line then Murray will hit the backhand drive or slice cross-court, and so on. His game is just too predictable and feeding opponents with rhythm.

I still maintain he could do well to slow down the first serve as well. Not drastically, but I think the 135mph bombs are unnecessary, especially on today's slow courts and he very rarely lands them. Slow it down to somewhere between 120-128 to get the percentage up and have some faith in your game to win the point on the back of a solid serve - don't go for the ace everytime.

laurie-1
11-25-2009, 10:52 AM
Murray needs to work a LOT on hitting down the line in the off-season. He seems to have lost all confidence in his backhand down the line which used to be his signature shot, and he hardly ever hits an aggressive forehand down the line.

The typical Murray rally is he'll trade forehands cross-court everytime until his opponent hits one down the line then Murray will hit the backhand drive or slice cross-court, and so on. His game is just too predictable and feeding opponents with rhythm.

I still maintain he could do well to slow down the first serve as well. Not drastically, but I think the 135mph bombs are unnecessary, especially on today's slow courts and he very rarely lands them. Slow it down to somewhere between 120-128 to get the percentage up and have some faith in your game to win the point on the back of a solid serve - don't go for the ace everytime.

It was really frustrating to watch that last night. Murray kept going for serves well over 130mph especially on the ad side and kept missing, and then his 2nd serve would be around 80mph - too big a difference. Also, he hit some double faults because he was actually going for too much on the 2nd serve, he's well aware now that players are after it.

Federer was hitting 1st serves around 125mph but they had lots of spin and therefore much more effective and he had a higher 1st serve percentage (I am assuming this having been there, I don't know the statistics of the match).

Bernard Black
11-25-2009, 11:07 AM
It was really frustrating to watch that last night. Murray kept going for serves well over 130mph especially on the ad side and kept missing, and then his 2nd serve would be around 80mph - too big a difference. Also, he hit some double faults because he was actually going for too much on the 2nd serve, he's well aware now that players are after it.

Federer was hitting 1st serves around 125mph but they had lots of spin and therefore much more effective and he had a higher 1st serve percentage (I am assuming this having been there, I don't know the statistics of the match).

You're right, Federer's serving was much more effective. Hopefully with experience Murray will use his serve more intelligently, he has solid enough technique and it could become a dominant weapon with some work.

Wish I could have been there too. On the TV it sounded like the crowd were well behind Federer for much of it which was surprising, did it feel like that in the arena too? I found myself rooting for Federer too, he's just fantastic to watch when in full flow.

laurie-1
11-25-2009, 12:08 PM
You're right, Federer's serving was much more effective. Hopefully with experience Murray will use his serve more intelligently, he has solid enough technique and it could become a dominant weapon with some work.

Wish I could have been there too. On the TV it sounded like the crowd were well behind Federer for much of it which was surprising, did it feel like that in the arena too? I found myself rooting for Federer too, he's just fantastic to watch when in full flow.

Yes it did, even before the match began you could tell by the hubub that Federer would have great support.

I would actually say it was almost equal support for both players. That may have helped Federer who knows.

Jōris
11-25-2009, 12:15 PM
Murray must improve his mental game and focus. Too many times he goes missing after winning the first set.

Vida
11-25-2009, 12:18 PM
Murray must improve his mental game and focus. Too many times he goes missing after winning the first set.

just out of curiosity, how does one do that?

Everko
11-25-2009, 12:18 PM
just out of curiosity, how does one do that?

its not easy

Vida
11-25-2009, 12:23 PM
its not easy

that I figure. I wanna know about steps.. one, two, three...

what, shrink?

Jōris
11-25-2009, 12:42 PM
just out of curiosity, how does one do that?

Stay on the match after the first set and through repetition it will become a habit. His achievements indicate he's mentally strong, so improving his focus is well within his reach.

Vida
11-25-2009, 01:03 PM
Stay on the match after the first set and through repetition it will become a habit. His achievements indicate he's mentally strong, so improving his focus is well within his reach.

well, would not he had thought of that already? he is 22 y old top player after all. he's there for quite a while now.

also he has big brain trust behind him, that (I imagine) includes far more smart people than those in his box, all given the funding LTA invested in his development.

Jōris
11-25-2009, 01:29 PM
well, would not he had thought of that already? he is 22 y old top player after all. he's there for quite a while now.

also he has big brain trust behind him, that (I imagine) includes far more smart people than those in his box, all given the funding LTA invested in his development.

LTA is Greg Rusedski, safin rules no.1 and Ditherliss. I'd attach no blame whatsoever to Murray.

munZe konZa
11-25-2009, 01:50 PM
just out of curiosity, how does one do that?

to me he looks sick and his symptoms seem consistent with someone in vitamin D deficiency so if I were him I would load up on some vitamin supplements

Byrd
11-25-2009, 01:52 PM
to me he looks sick and his symptoms seem consistent with someone in vitamin D deficiency so if I were him I would load up on some vitamin supplements

Faker could do with some as well, would stop him from retiring in every tight match :wavey:

munZe konZa
11-25-2009, 01:58 PM
Faker could do with some as well, would stop him from retiring in every tight match :wavey:

wouldn't hurt him but Nole hasn't retired since Australia and played the most matches this year

laurie-1
11-25-2009, 02:06 PM
wouldn't hurt him but Nole hasn't retired since Australia and played the most matches this year

That's positive because it shows Novak responded well to the criticisms and unwanted reputation he was starting to receive after that match in Australia.

That's what Andy has to start doing, respond well to criticism and take on board the good points of that criticism and use it to his advantage.

Because at the end of the day, the criticisms are actually constructive and well intentioned. With Andy Murray's talent we feel he can go very far if he applies his talent properly.

munZe konZa
11-25-2009, 02:16 PM
there are differences between criticisms whether they are constructive or destructive , subjective or objective , personal or interpersonal. One has to know to differentiate and accept constructive , subjective and interpersonal criticisms while rejecting the bad criticisms.

Start da Game
11-25-2009, 03:21 PM
murray has better backhand than delpotro, better anticipation than delpotro, better athleticim than delpotro, better return of serve than delpotro, better skill at the net than delpotro, level on first serve with delpotro.......but what happened? delpotro wins a slam while murray watches it in some sort of disbelief.......why? you can guess.......

Vida
11-25-2009, 04:06 PM
LTA is Greg Rusedski, safin rules no.1 and Ditherliss. I'd attach no blame whatsoever to Murray.

hahaaa. yes good one.

on point, to me it looks murray is as mentaly stable and focus as he can get. main reason he is o focused is his game. its a re-action game, not action, so not much space to be lacking in focus, certainly not as much in players who must 'execute', step in. no no, this is more or less murray's celling. he cant be more defensive than he is. in his given way he plays, he is as focus and stable as it gets.

he should either hope it pays off - and Im not saying it wont - or revamp the way he plays.

R.Federer
11-25-2009, 05:21 PM
Nothing is certain, but given recent performance, talent and age, I would be really quite shocked if he didn't ever win a slam.

That said, if he didn't win one next year, it would not be the most shocking ever. He is not a lock anywhere. He hasn't really done great at the AO, is far from top-4 at the French and there are at least as good players at W and the USO. Of course, now that I put it that way, he will probably win French and AO before the others ....

Vida
11-25-2009, 06:19 PM
Nothing is certain, but given recent performance, talent and age, I would be really quite shocked if he didn't ever win a slam.

That said, if he didn't win one next year, it would not be the most shocking ever. He is not a lock anywhere. He hasn't really done great at the AO, is far from top-4 at the French and there are at least as good players at W and the USO. Of course, now that I put it that way, he will probably win French and AO before the others ....

that is a good estimation of his prospects. somehow I feel he will benefit from the lack of consistency that top players will inevitably display at slams once the old geezer is gone in a few years.

JediFed
11-25-2009, 07:04 PM
He still has time. It won't be until Wimbledon in 2011, that he will be behind Lendl. So he's got another 7 tournaments. He has one more before Federer's win. Federer didn't win till shortly before his 23rd birthday.

Jōris
11-25-2009, 07:30 PM
Faker could do with some as well, would stop him from retiring in every tight match :wavey:

Djokovic isn't to blame. Why should he stay on court when breathing problems leads to dizziness and lack of focus.

Vida
11-25-2009, 08:16 PM
Djokovic isn't to blame. Why should he stay on court when breathing problems leads to dizziness and lack of focus.

decision to retire from his match against roddick was the smartest he made in his life.

Jōris
11-25-2009, 08:20 PM
decision to retire from his match against roddick was the smartest he made in his life.

I was really irritated after the match but I understand now his health issues have a major influence on his game.

Vida
11-25-2009, 08:31 PM
I was really irritated after the match but I understand now his health issues have a major influence on his game.

huh, I was irritated as hell. I had a day full of things to do in front of me, and woke up in like 3 a.m. to watch the thing, with like 2 hours of drunken sleep prior. than this happened.

its been talked about a lot, but those symptoms he displayed can lead to only one outcome if not treated immediately. thats for sure.

buddyholly
11-25-2009, 09:14 PM
Andy Murray is the best player to come out of Britain since Tim Henman. In some ways Murray is better than Henman with more titles at the age of 22 than Henman had in his career. Plus Murray has already played in a Major final. Despite this I find myself thinking Murray is still far away from a Major title and needs a combination of luck and a change of attitude.

I had my first opportunity to see Murray up close in the quarterfinal of the French Open this year against Fernando Gonzalez (Andy was thrashed) That thrashing confirmed some of the misgivings I have about Murrayís game.

First of all, Murray is the tallest counter puncher Iíve come across (or is that Monfils?). Usually guys that height are looking to impose their game on their opponents. What amazed me was the lack of weight of shot by Murray, not much depth and not very fast. Iíve been going to live tournaments since 1995 and seen most players, Fabrice Santoro is the only other player Iíve seen hit ground strokes without much pace or depth. What was really depressing was Andyís 2nd serve, it could only be described as powderpuff and Fernando had a field day. In the preceding match, both Victoria Azarenka and Dinara Safina were hitting faster 2nd serves on the kph clock.

I think Murray has to up his game to be a slam winner. The match against Gonzalez was the norm and not the exception. In the Aussie Open match against Verdasco, after been two sets to one up, Murray handed the initiative to Fernando who obliged, realising Murray had no pace to his shots and was dropping the ball short often, allowing Verdasco to take over the match in the 4th and 5th sets Ė almost a lack of belief. It also happened in the US Open against Cilic. In the Wimbledon semifinal against Roddick, Murray said in the Press conference that it was close and could have gone either way. The reality was Roddick was mostly in control and Andy was playing catch up the whole match, Roddick was really taking advantage of Andyís 72mph 2nd serve (as Jeff Tarango puts it).

I also feel Andy has a flawed belief in how to win slam tournaments. After Federerís first service game in the 2008 US Open final, I concluded Murray would lose the match in 3 sets Ė Why? Because Murray was standing on the fence to return serve on a hard court, and all Federer had to do was keeping spinning the ball out wide to open up the court (which he did). Plus, Andyís 2nd serve was so slow and short Federer was chipping and charging him all day (something Federer normally doesnít perform). And after the match, Murray said that he didnít serve well (true). He also said that if he serves at 70% first serves he will win.

Unfortunately for Murray when he misses his 1st serve he is in all kinds of bother, because his 2nd serve is so inadequate at slam level, he often wins well under 45% of 2nd serve points on his own serve. And at the slam level itís not possible to win a slam with those figures.

Therefore I think Murray needs to change his attitude and mindset. I think Murray needs to work on his 2nd serve in the off season to get more depth, more pace and more slice which he could use to serve to the body or out wide as an alternative to slow topspin which lands in the middle of the box begging to be hit. Murray should concentrate on getting 60-65% 1st serves in because no one hits 75% first serves consistently in big matches when the pressure is on. That will force Andy to improve his 2nd serves because he needs to win at least 55% of his 2nd serve points in big matches.

I think Andy relies on his retrieval and defensive skills to much and is happy to hit the passing shot, but as Roddick showed at Wimbledon, its difficult to keep doing that under pressure, Murray wasnít able to do it. Murray needs to take the offence more often by been prepared to come in behind strong ground strokes - as far as I can see he has good volleys. And he did this in 2008 US Open semifinal against Nadal.

Finally I wonder if Murray has a too friendly coaching set up? I know he has to feel comfortable with who he works with but is Miles McLaghan big enough to tell him that playing too defensive doesnít win slam tournaments and he needs to develop an offensive game.

I wonder what you think of my assessment and Murrayís chances next year in the Major tournaments

I do hope Murray reads this. I want him to win a slam and there is more good stuff in here than all his team could provide in a lifetime.

Arkulari
11-25-2009, 09:26 PM
He still has time. It won't be until Wimbledon in 2011, that he will be behind Lendl. So he's got another 7 tournaments. He has one more before Federer's win. Federer didn't win till shortly before his 23rd birthday.

22 ;)

JediFed
11-25-2009, 09:38 PM
Why did I think 23rd? You are correct. He's still only a slam behind Federer though.