WWW: Andy Murray vs. John Isner [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

WWW: Andy Murray vs. John Isner

Clydey
01-22-2010, 07:08 AM
The way Isner is playing, this could be tight. Not going to be easy to beat.

Discuss.

philosophicalarf
01-22-2010, 07:11 AM
Far better for Murray than a long match against Monfils, that was looking like horrible prep for a meeting with Nadal.

Certinfy
01-22-2010, 07:12 AM
Don't mind who wins, but I'm edging toward Isner here :o

rubbERR
01-22-2010, 07:13 AM
isner, easily

brithater
01-22-2010, 07:22 AM
I think the biggest factor will be Murrays serve. Andy looks to have the weakest serve in the top 20 right now.

Stensland
01-22-2010, 07:23 AM
murray in three fairly easy sets.

Bargearse
01-22-2010, 07:24 AM
I'm going for the upset here and picking Isner in 5. Maybe wishful thinking, I dunno. :scratch:

-Valhalla-
01-22-2010, 07:26 AM
Isner's in the zone and will present alot of problems for Murray with his monster serve. If Murray gets tight, it could go five.

shadows
01-22-2010, 07:28 AM
Oh wow, a match where I actually want Andy to win quite badly heh.

Murray returns better than Monfils, don't see him having any problems. Isner will need at least two tb's to stand a chance.

Audacity
01-22-2010, 07:48 AM
Murray in 4.

dombrfc
01-22-2010, 08:12 AM
Murray to come through. 4 sets, Isner's set being a tiebreak

freeandlonely
01-22-2010, 08:15 AM
Murray in 4.

zerocool_
01-22-2010, 08:19 AM
I hope Isner :)

sammy01
01-22-2010, 08:33 AM
i can deffinately see john getting a set. if he settles early and gets the 1st set could be very intresting. i still give the edge to murray, but don't discount john for this one.

Steelq
01-22-2010, 11:34 AM
Murrays joke draw continues,no real test until a qf.

DartMarcus
01-22-2010, 11:35 AM
I think Murray will clinch this, but John will give a fight.
Factors in favour of Murray: Andy will handle John's serve better, will also win like 75% of baseline points, his passing shots will also be helpful in stopping John's volley attemps, Isner will be more tired if the match goes long.
Factors in favour of Isner: great serve, mental toughness especially on TB, british serve not really difficult, nothing to lose. Can have a great start.

Corey Feldman
01-22-2010, 11:36 AM
if Muzza doesnt win this... just forget it.

Andi-M
01-22-2010, 11:45 AM
This is a weird one, would have felt more confident with Monfils.

If Murray shows up he should win in 3, but if 1st serve is off could be a 5 set battle.

brithater
01-22-2010, 11:49 AM
This is a weird one, would have felt more confident with Monfils.

If Murray shows up he should win in 3, but if 1st serve is off could be a 5 set battle.

Um....When has Murrays first serve been on? Murrays serve right now is right up there with Micheal Chang.

green25814
01-22-2010, 11:50 AM
Isner has the game to potentially cause ANYONE problems. Difficult to predict.

edit: ^Thats a little harsh. Murray's found his first serve on a few occasions recently, and its better than djoker, pony and nadal when its on.

coonster14
01-22-2010, 11:52 AM
murray in 4!!! i want to see that QF against rafa.

brithater
01-22-2010, 12:02 PM
Isner has the game to potentially cause ANYONE problems. Difficult to predict.

edit: ^Thats a little harsh. Murray's found his first serve on a few occasions recently, and its better than djoker, pony and nadal when its on.

Negatory. Murray has the worst serve of any player in the top 20. When your are haveing a good day at 55% you do not have one of the games better serves. Anyone has a good serve when they are on, thats a given. When Murray is on he is barely at 60% and even then its nothing special. Dont fall for the hype on players. Thats usually all it is. Murray is one of the most overhyped players on tour. I dont hate Murray but some of the things people say are rediculous.

green25814
01-22-2010, 12:07 PM
Negatory. Murray has the worst serve of any player in the top 20. When your are haveing a good day at 55% you do not have one of the games better serves. Anyone has a good serve when they are on, thats a given. When Murray is on he is barely at 60% and even then its nothing special. Dont fall for the hype on players. Thats usually all it is. Murray is one of the most overhyped players on tour. I dont hate Murray but some of the things people say are rediculous.

55%-60% is about the same as potro, djokovic and nadal. In terms of talent, I'd say Murray has the best first serve out of those three, its very fluid. It has the potential to become a real weapon, though its not at that stage yet I'd agree.

Andi-M
01-22-2010, 12:18 PM
Negatory. Murray has the worst serve of any player in the top 20. When your are haveing a good day at 55% you do not have one of the games better serves. Anyone has a good serve when they are on, thats a given. When Murray is on he is barely at 60% and even then its nothing special. Dont fall for the hype on players. Thats usually all it is. Murray is one of the most overhyped players on tour. I dont hate Murray but some of the things people say are rediculous.

Murray has had 1st serve % up in low 70's on occasion when he is playing really well. But a good day for Andy would be 62-63% because he goes for his 1st serve he dosent spin it in to get rally started. When it goes in he wins 75% of points on a bad day but is often in the 85+ range. His 1st serve is definately a weapon.

brithater
01-22-2010, 12:23 PM
nope. Its a flawed motion. He falls on it and hits it on the way down giving him less clearance than someone who explodes up into the ball ala Federer, Jokovich, Roddick, etc etc. Delpotro stays up more and also has the hieght advantage. His motion is flawed in that his range of motion is not fully developed. If he fixes that....watch out. Nadal is hard to say because he has like three different motions he uses but he does exploded up into the ball unlike Murray.

Murray has a Flawed motion and always will. The only way he will get his percentages up will be through takeing pace off the ball. His second serve will never be top quality either for the same reasons. He does have a nice backhand though. Good rotation and a Strong Right arm that extends through his contact zone very well. Forehand is Average. Movement is good but nothing monumental reguardless of what madia says. Volleys are solid. Hes basically a scrapper with a really good backhand ansd everything else is OK. He is good at covering weaknesses in his game though and thats a big reason he gets the wins.

tennishero
01-22-2010, 12:25 PM
lol at this rate murray will end up playing boredo in the finals.

brithater
01-22-2010, 12:30 PM
Murray has had 1st serve % up in low 70's on occasion when he is playing really well. But a good day for Andy would be 62-63% because he goes for his 1st serve he dosent spin it in to get rally started. When it goes in he wins 75% of points on a bad day but is often in the 85+ range. His 1st serve is definately a weapon.

Changs 1st serve was a weapon to when it went in. Andy is hovering in the 50s now. He goes flat on his first serve because its just a gamble to get a free point (like Chang). Good servers dont throw away serves like that. They mix spins and pace up all the time. Watch the good servers Roddick, Federer, Sampras, Lopez, etc. Murray should be more accuratly compared to a server like Hewitt or Chang.

rocketassist
01-22-2010, 12:31 PM
Easy draw clowns out in force again :rolleyes: Most don't realise you can't play a top 10er till the QF if you're seeded 5.

John is class anyway, better than Mugfils.

Murray probably takes it but hope John makes it a battle.

Certinfy
01-22-2010, 12:44 PM
55%-60% is about the same as potro, djokovic and nadal. In terms of talent, I'd say Murray has the best first serve out of those three, its very fluid. It has the potential to become a real weapon, though its not at that stage yet I'd agree.Murray having a better serve than Del Potro :spit:

green25814
01-22-2010, 12:45 PM
nope. Its a flawed motion. He falls on it and hits it on the way down giving him less clearance than someone who explodes up into the ball ala Federer, Jokovich, Roddick, etc etc. Delpotro stays up more and also has the hieght advantage. His motion is flawed in that his range of motion is not fully developed. If he fixes that....watch out. Nadal is hard to say because he has like three different motions he uses but he does exploded up into the ball unlike Murray.

Murray has a Flawed motion and always will. The only way he will get his percentages up will be through takeing pace off the ball. His second serve will never be top quality either for the same reasons. He does have a nice backhand though. Good rotation and a Strong Right arm that extends through his contact zone very well. Forehand is Average. Movement is good but nothing monumental reguardless of what madia says. Volleys are solid. Hes basically a scrapper with a really good backhand ansd everything else is OK. He is good at covering weaknesses in his game though and thats a big reason he gets the wins.

He doesn't 'fall' into it. He has a slight forward motion, which might perhaps give the impression of falling. Have you actually studied his serve, or are you just guessing? Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GFkqD7GBZQ - Murray's serve in slo motion. He clearly doesn't fall as he hits the ball.

Del Potro - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpQEJDtNSSM If anyones falling as he hits the ball, its del potro. Yes he's a tall man, but given his height he has a poor serve.

Federer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcjZ5r_YHV0 Clearly the best of the three examples, but its actually quite similar to Murray's.

green25814
01-22-2010, 12:47 PM
Murray having a better serve than Del Potro :spit:

I'm talking about service action. Del Potro's serve will always be more potent due to height, but it should be much better than it is.

Florida
01-22-2010, 12:49 PM
Isner is good, but Murray will prevail. I like how Murray is flying under the radar, but I like so far his performance. He can make a deep run here..... I am not a fan of Murray's game, but he has a chance.....

FedFan
01-22-2010, 01:00 PM
Bad match up for Isner. He is not the typ of player, who can give Murray too many problems.

Andy will prevail.

tennishero
01-22-2010, 01:05 PM
Easy draw clowns out in force again :rolleyes: Most don't realise you can't play a top 10er till the QF if you're seeded 5.

John is class anyway, better than Mugfils.

Murray probably takes it but hope John makes it a battle.


murray's opponents rankings:

anderson - 148
gicquel - 57 (33 years old)
serra - 64
isner - 28

delpo's rankings:

russel - 90
blake - 45 (around 20-10 really)
mayer - 60
ciclic - 14

conclusion: easy draw for him.

born_on_clay
01-22-2010, 01:19 PM
Isner will win...........


1 set :)

brithater
01-22-2010, 01:27 PM
He doesn't 'fall' into it. He has a slight forward motion, which might perhaps give the impression of falling. Have you actually studied his serve, or are you just guessing? Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GFkqD7GBZQ - Murray's serve in slo motion. He clearly doesn't fall as he hits the ball.

Del Potro - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpQEJDtNSSM If anyones falling as he hits the ball, its del potro. Yes he's a tall man, but given his height he has a poor serve.

Federer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcjZ5r_YHV0 Clearly the best of the three examples, but its actually quite similar to Murray's.

No. Federers serve is nothing like Murrays. Not even close.

He does not push up into it and he has a forward motion....he falls into it. It really becomes evident when he is a little off or tired because its not a delivery produced by the body as a whole. I have studied Andy Murrys strokes in dept. The first thing Murray needs to do to improve his serve is get more out of the lower body. His serve is an upper body serve with a weak loading phase and an equally flawed rotation. If he was under 6 ft he would never get away with it. If you want to see a perfect serve in terms of rotation and load watch ultra slow motion footage of Roddick from different andgles. Although his serve looks unorthidox it is technically perfect. Federers is also very close but not quite. Delpotro is like Isner and Karlovich in that they are so tall they can actually hit down and still be high percentage as long as the extension is perfect.

Murray is a dumb player sometimes. His most technically sound shots are his Backhand and his Volleys but he plays neutral with his backhand too much and rarely comes to net. The man does not know how to utilize his strengths and emphasizes on trying to cover up weaknesses to much. His second worse shot is his forehand and he tries to dictate with it sometimes???? He is arrogant and stuborn and thats why he has not won a slam. Deep down Like Hewitt he is a defensive minded player that does not want to take chances. The difference is that hewitt is a warrior and Murray is a wilter. If your going to play a counter punching defensive game and expect to win slams(like Nadal or Hewitt)you need to be a warrior and one of the most mentally tuff (do anything to win or die trying)guys on the tour. Murray does not have that. Therefor he must learn to utilize his strengths as a player (backhand,net game,return). I am not seeing it this tourney.

Think Jonas Bjorkman in his prime. That is who should be coaching Murray. Instead he has people like Alex Corretja, who I like but is all wrong for Andy.

green25814
01-22-2010, 01:41 PM
No. Federers serve is nothing like Murrays. Not even close.

He does not push up into it and he has a forward motion....he falls into it. It really becomes evident when he is a little off or tired because its not a delivery produced by the body as a whole. I have studied Andy Murrys strokes in dept. The first thing Murray needs to do to improve his serve is get more out of the lower body. His serve is an upper body serve with a weak loading phase and an equally flawed rotation.


:spit: These are just words. Watch the video. He quite clearly hits the ball on the rise. Yes, he does have a forward motion but he doesn't fall. I'm not sure why you'd bother claiming that when the video quite clearly refutes it.

paseo
01-22-2010, 01:54 PM
Murrays joke draw continues,no real test until a qf.

Djokovic's draw is more hilarious.

Anyway, Murray in 3.

brithater
01-22-2010, 01:54 PM
Because you clearly have no idea of what you are talking about. Go study biomechanics, kineseology,and anatomy. Then spend countless hours analyzing technique from atheletes of all sports including tennis. The have professionals in a variety of sports pay you large sums of money to analize body movement. Then get back to me. Until then you are a fanboy blinded by some delusion of Murray haveing one of the better service motions in the modern game.

Florida
01-22-2010, 02:07 PM
Murray's serve, especially the 2nd screams for improvement.... But he still has more tennis brain than Isner as well as experience and that will be a deciding factor in their encounter.......

brithater
01-22-2010, 02:19 PM
Other deciding factors...

Time of Day = Heat (advantage Murray)
Return of Serve (advantage Murray)
Pressure (advantage Isner)

Arhaych
01-22-2010, 02:42 PM
No. Federers serve is nothing like Murrays. Not even close.

He does not push up into it and he has a forward motion....he falls into it. It really becomes evident when he is a little off or tired because its not a delivery produced by the body as a whole. I have studied Andy Murrys strokes in dept. The first thing Murray needs to do to improve his serve is get more out of the lower body. His serve is an upper body serve with a weak loading phase and an equally flawed rotation. If he was under 6 ft he would never get away with it. If you want to see a perfect serve in terms of rotation and load watch ultra slow motion footage of Roddick from different andgles. Although his serve looks unorthidox it is technically perfect. Federers is also very close but not quite. Delpotro is like Isner and Karlovich in that they are so tall they can actually hit down and still be high percentage as long as the extension is perfect.

Murray is a dumb player sometimes. His most technically sound shots are his Backhand and his Volleys but he plays neutral with his backhand too much and rarely comes to net. The man does not know how to utilize his strengths and emphasizes on trying to cover up weaknesses to much. His second worse shot is his forehand and he tries to dictate with it sometimes???? He is arrogant and stuborn and thats why he has not won a slam. Deep down Like Hewitt he is a defensive minded player that does not want to take chances. The difference is that hewitt is a warrior and Murray is a wilter. If your going to play a counter punching defensive game and expect to win slams(like Nadal or Hewitt)you need to be a warrior and one of the most mentally tuff (do anything to win or die trying)guys on the tour. Murray does not have that. Therefor he must learn to utilize his strengths as a player (backhand,net game,return). I am not seeing it this tourney.

Think Jonas Bjorkman in his prime. That is who should be coaching Murray. Instead he has people like Alex Corretja, who I like but is all wrong for Andy.

I'll listen to you, and consider what you're saying when you show me coaching badges. You're an armchair tennis fan who has little to no idea about stroke mechanics. Not one tennis pundit, nor coach has slated Murray's service action. I agree that it is not as fluent as Djokovic's or Federer's service motion. But when it's on form, Murray has beaten Federer without facing a single break point.

Also, it's not Murray's fault that Melzer and Monfils have crashed out ; you can only play who is put infront of you.

Murray in 4, Isner should grab a set here the way he is playing.

brithater
01-22-2010, 02:57 PM
Nice try. Grow up sonny. This is the mens forum. I could care less about what you think. You speak what ifs and hypotheticals and your analysis is of one single serve from one peticular angle. Study what fundamental components go into great technique create energy within the body and you may begin to grasp what I am talking about. Until then your a fan boy.

By the way. I believe Murray takes this match as well. Maybe Four Sets. You never know with Isner though.

kindling
01-22-2010, 02:59 PM
Isner's got all the confidence in the world right now, Murray's still completely full of himself, like always, but not sure if that compares to Isner's boost right now. Hoping John pulls the upset. Someone get Murray a razor.

brithater
01-22-2010, 03:05 PM
Other than the serve Isners best weapon is his heart. He looked very mentally and physically drained today and fought through it. Big John is the Braveheart for every college players that tried to make it on the tour and got beat down.

selyoink
01-22-2010, 03:21 PM
If Murray doesn't win this one in straight sets he should be forced to retire.

LaFuria
01-22-2010, 03:23 PM
For all of Mugray's faults he isn't Mugfils and should easily win this one.

green25814
01-22-2010, 03:25 PM
Because you clearly have no idea of what you are talking about. Go study biomechanics, kineseology,and anatomy. Then spend countless hours analyzing technique from atheletes of all sports including tennis. The have professionals in a variety of sports pay you large sums of money to analize body movement. Then get back to me. Until then you are a fanboy blinded by some delusion of Murray haveing one of the better service motions in the modern game.

What, because you have? This is the internet. I have no idea who you are, and unless you can prove otherwise your 'word' means nothing. I showed video evidence, all you did was make a bunch of claims, then get angry when proved wrong.

I'm not saying Murray is Sampras. I do however believe he has a good basic service motion from which to build. I'm certainly not a fanboy either. I call things as I see them.

green25814
01-22-2010, 03:27 PM
Other than the serve Isners best weapon is his heart. He looked very mentally and physically drained today and fought through it. Big John is the Braveheart for every college players that tried to make it on the tour and got beat down.

Agreed. I respect John a lot, he's a clutch player, and I expect it to be a close encounter.

rocketassist
01-22-2010, 03:35 PM
murray's opponents rankings:

anderson - 148
gicquel - 57 (33 years old)
serra - 64
isner - 28

delpo's rankings:

russel - 90
blake - 45 (around 20-10 really)
mayer - 60
ciclic - 14

conclusion: easy draw for him.

Blake 'around 20-10 really' :haha: Anderson is under-ranked if we're going to go down that round.

Both Gicquel and Serra are higher ranked than Mayer :shrug: And Johnny's form is just as good as Cilic. If you want a pish draw, look at Faker's.

River
01-22-2010, 03:40 PM
My money's on my man, the Viper John Isner~

He just slithers slowly when he gets ready between points before he strikes. Fucking awesome, and it deals so good on crowd control. He doesn't seem phased at all any time. Murray's gonna explode in frustration on this guy

brithater
01-22-2010, 03:41 PM
What, because you have? This is the internet. I have no idea who you are, and unless you can prove otherwise your 'word' means nothing. I showed video evidence, all you did was make a bunch of claims, then get angry when proved wrong.

I'm not saying Murray is Sampras. I do however believe he has a good basic service motion from which to build. I'm certainly not a fanboy either. I call things as I see them.

Not angry. All in good fun. Tough to get me really riled as I deal with headcases with attitudes all day long. Be careful useing videos to learn about technique. They can be helpful but they can also be very misleading. I learned that the hard way when I was young. The first thing you should study is anatomy and get a really good basis on types of muscles and groups of muscles. The go on to biomechanics. Then study tennis technique. Many pros have major flaws and there is a reason why some are way better than others.

They are getting to the point where they test chemical makeup in the brain now. Sports involves an unbelievable amount of science at the highest levels. It gets a little rediculous sometimes.

McAlistar
01-22-2010, 03:43 PM
Murray in straights, he eats like mugs this for breakfast. Best passer in the game, should be something like 7-5,6-3,6-2

zoparrat
01-22-2010, 03:44 PM
Murray is a terrible match-up for Isner. I expect 20 UE's from Isner per set or something. In my book, Isner will have done great if he manages to reach a tie-break. So Murray in 3 or 4 I say.

Aenea
01-22-2010, 04:15 PM
I'm surprised Isner made it this far. I'm expecting a straight set win for Murray.

Alley-oop
01-22-2010, 07:09 PM
John-Boy in 5 :aplot:

Noleta
01-22-2010, 07:16 PM
Murray in 3,his passing shots will prove too much for the giant.

scoobs
01-22-2010, 07:19 PM
On the face of it this is a good matchup for Andy and the circumstances work in his favour too - Isner is very low on gas from winning Auckland and some tough matches here, and Andy has made pretty serene progress thus far.

Nevertheless this is Andy Murray and his Grand Slam record is littered with losses to players that the general consensus is that he should beat, often fairly easily. So this one's not to be taken from granted. Isner is weary but he's also confident.

I'm saying Andy in 4 though.

TheBrainiac
01-22-2010, 07:39 PM
Big John will win 6-0 6-0 6-1 .

jadey
01-22-2010, 08:06 PM
Isner's got all the confidence in the world right now, Murray's still completely full of himself, like always, but not sure if that compares to Isner's boost right now. Hoping John pulls the upset. Someone get Murray a razor.

Murray .. full of himself ???? :rolleyes:

Hes 1 of the more humble guys on tour . Oh and the stubble is sexy :D

ossie
01-22-2010, 08:10 PM
your going down isner

Jōris
01-22-2010, 09:04 PM
Isner in four.

Topspin Forehand
01-22-2010, 09:45 PM
Murray's mickey mouse draw continues. Murray in straight sets.

xargon
01-22-2010, 09:49 PM
Isner will take this.

Goldenoldie
01-22-2010, 11:18 PM
Isner is ranked 28 - I'm surprised so many people back him to win against the world #4:confused:

serveandvolley80
01-22-2010, 11:21 PM
Isner is ranked 28 - I'm surprised so many people back him to win against the world #4:confused:

Murray is a choker that's possibly why.

DrJules
01-22-2010, 11:30 PM
Murray to win.

Ability to return big serves and use Isner shot pace.

MatchFederer
01-22-2010, 11:38 PM
The way Isner is playing, this could be tight. Not going to be easy to beat.

Discuss.

GOD D**N you just took avatars to a WHOLE NEW F*****G LEVEL.




I see, so they haven't played each other before... but this is surely a bad match-up for Isner given Murray's retrieval abilities. He will eat up Isner's groundies in general rallies as well and I doubt even Isner's sometimes pretty strong forehand is gonna trouble the Scot.

HOWEVER>>

Despite that fact Murray is maybe THE best returner in the game, if Isner serves very well we could be seeing some tie-breaks. Correct me if I'm wrong folks but Isner has an absolutely stellar record in tie-breaks recently...

:cool:

MrChopin
01-22-2010, 11:55 PM
Can't imagine Murray will have much trouble here unless he redefines pushing Tomic-style. Murray feasts on Ivo's serves even better than Fed. Then again, Big John has a set while Ivo does not.

Xristos
01-23-2010, 12:00 AM
Hopefully Isner.

roberthenman
01-23-2010, 12:30 AM
Andy easily in 3

Goldenoldie
01-23-2010, 12:33 AM
Murray is a choker that's possibly why.

I've heard Murray called many things, but that's a new one. Perhaps your definition of a choker is different from mine?

-Valhalla-
01-23-2010, 01:13 AM
Isner is ranked 28 - I'm surprised so many people back him to win against the world #4:confused:

Clutchner will be in the top 20 after AO :hatoff:

enigma
01-23-2010, 02:25 AM
Murray in 3

rawalya
01-23-2010, 04:08 AM
Andy will win this , no big upset :p

thegreendestiny
01-23-2010, 05:11 AM
Murray in 3 easy sets. His game is the perfect antidote to very tall big-serving crappy movers such as Isner.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 05:26 AM
GOD D**N you just took avatars to a WHOLE NEW F*****G LEVEL.



I needed your approval. I'm glad that I now have it. You made llama avatars cool.

MatchFederer
01-23-2010, 05:42 AM
I needed your approval. I'm glad that I now have it. You made llama avatars cool.

One great avatar change deserves another...

UsD.AnDreS
01-23-2010, 09:45 AM
Rod Laver Arena
11:00 Start
Men's Singles - 4th Round
Andy Murray(GBR)[5] vs. John Isner(USA)[33]

33rd seeded..wow) (that was at the AO site shedule)

Horatio Caine
01-23-2010, 11:05 AM
No. Federers serve is nothing like Murrays. Not even close.

He does not push up into it and he has a forward motion....he falls into it. It really becomes evident when he is a little off or tired because its not a delivery produced by the body as a whole. I have studied Andy Murrys strokes in dept. The first thing Murray needs to do to improve his serve is get more out of the lower body. His serve is an upper body serve with a weak loading phase and an equally flawed rotation. If he was under 6 ft he would never get away with it. If you want to see a perfect serve in terms of rotation and load watch ultra slow motion footage of Roddick from different andgles. Although his serve looks unorthidox it is technically perfect. Federers is also very close but not quite. Delpotro is like Isner and Karlovich in that they are so tall they can actually hit down and still be high percentage as long as the extension is perfect.

Murray is a dumb player sometimes. His most technically sound shots are his Backhand and his Volleys but he plays neutral with his backhand too much and rarely comes to net. The man does not know how to utilize his strengths and emphasizes on trying to cover up weaknesses to much. His second worse shot is his forehand and he tries to dictate with it sometimes???? He is arrogant and stuborn and thats why he has not won a slam. Deep down Like Hewitt he is a defensive minded player that does not want to take chances. The difference is that hewitt is a warrior and Murray is a wilter. If your going to play a counter punching defensive game and expect to win slams(like Nadal or Hewitt)you need to be a warrior and one of the most mentally tuff (do anything to win or die trying)guys on the tour. Murray does not have that. Therefor he must learn to utilize his strengths as a player (backhand,net game,return). I am not seeing it this tourney.

Think Jonas Bjorkman in his prime. That is who should be coaching Murray. Instead he has people like Alex Corretja, who I like but is all wrong for Andy.

Excellent post.


Expecting Murray to come through...he has a big edge on fitness and I'm expecting that to be decisive if the match becomes as close as it could. He is a nightmare match-up for someone like Isner, so a straight sets win is certainly possible. However, if his serving is poor again and he is too defensive then I can see Big John teeing off and potentially causing trouble early on.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 11:09 AM
Excellent post.

You actually thought that was a good post? He basically called Murray an average player with an above average backhand. Look at the guy's name. Objectivity isn't what he's known for.

Sophocles
01-23-2010, 11:14 AM
You actually thought that was a good post? He basically called Murray an average player with an above average backhand. Look at the guy's name. Objectivity isn't what he's known for.

He's right about Murray's strengths though (backhand, net game, return, and I'd add 1st serve when it's working, touch, and retrieving). And the fact he should use them more aggressively.

Horatio Caine
01-23-2010, 11:16 AM
You actually thought that was a good post? He basically called Murray an average player with an above average backhand. Look at the guy's name. Objectivity isn't what he's known for.

Yeah.

He makes good points on the players' serves.

I agree with him in that Muzza doesn't use his strengths enough...and for the last year he has been more afraid to take risks. I wouldn't necessarily say that he is arrogant, but he is certainly stubborn. That much is evident in some of the choices he has made in his career to date (although not all of them have been the wrong choices), and in some of his play certainly over the last 12 months...if his game plan (to keep getting balls back) isn't working for him he doesn't seem able/want to change it. That Roddick match at Wimbledon was hugely frustrating to watch, for instance. Rewind two years back and I think he'd have got the win.

I don't necessarily agree that Bjorkman should be coaching him (although I see the poster's ideas behind it...), but I agree that Corretja isn't the best option.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 11:27 AM
Yeah.

He makes good points on the players' serves.

I agree with him in that Muzza doesn't use his strengths enough...and for the last year he has been more afraid to take risks. I wouldn't necessarily say that he is arrogant, but he is certainly stubborn. That much is evident in some of the choices he has made in his career to date (although not all of them have been the wrong choices), and in some of his play certainly over the last 12 months...if his game plan (to keep getting balls back) isn't working for him he doesn't seem able/want to change it. That Roddick match at Wimbledon was hugely frustrating to watch, for instance. Rewind two years back and I think he'd have got the win.

I don't necessarily agree that Bjorkman should be coaching him (although I see the poster's ideas behind it...), but I agree that Corretja isn't the best option.

We've seen evidence this year that he is taking the ball on more, however. He's struck a nice balance thus far. He isn't going all out like he does against Nadal, which is the right call. The real test is whether he's brave enough to keep at it when the pressure is on. At the moment, he's playing precisely how I think he should play.

Horatio Caine
01-23-2010, 11:33 AM
We've seen evidence this year that he is taking the ball on more, however. He's struck a nice balance thus far. He isn't going all out like he does against Nadal, which is the right call. The real test is whether he's brave enough to keep at it when the pressure is on. At the moment, he's playing precisely how I think he should play.

Yep, he has shown a better balance so far, but he was never going to be remotely threatened by the players he has beaten so far. The proof will be in that eagerly anticipated QF with Nadal, which I really hope we will get. He will really need to mix things up and take some risks if he is to win that match.

However, I still fear that he will play in this fashion in his next matches with Federer, Del Potro, Roddick etc...and he is more likely to be on the receiving end if he does so.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 11:48 AM
Yep, he has shown a better balance so far, but he was never going to be remotely threatened by the players he has beaten so far. The proof will be in that eagerly anticipated QF with Nadal, which I really hope we will get. He will really need to mix things up and take some risks if he is to win that match.


That's assuming he can get past Isner. The Murray serve is pretty fragile when his percentage drops, and Big John won't be donating too many service games. History tells us that Murray is due a brainfart right about now, so a match with Nadal is still a big if, at least as far as I'm concerned.

brithater
01-23-2010, 11:48 AM
Dont be fooled by my nickname because it has nothing to do with Scotts or British tennis players in general. When I look at players I am completely objective whether I like them or not. I think Fed is a complete jerk but has an incredible work ethic and game. I pretty much just look at the physical and mental side of players. Likeability is not a big deal for me. Rios was one of my favorites and he was an asshole.

The problem I have with Murray is that what people say is simply not true. The sooner he comes to terms with it the sooner he will have some big results.

He is not the best mover on tour

He is not the smartest player on tour- far from it

He is not a very versitile player

What is true is that people will spin Murrays ability like no other player I have seen. He does not adapt well when he is in mid match and tactics need to be changed. Unlike DJokavich he does not have an a game to go toe to toe with a hot big hitting opponent. So if he is ever is going to be in the realm of #1 or whatever he needs to be an extremely good tactical player. Utilzing strengths and knowing when to be aggresive and when to force errors. Any changes he makes in matches are modifications to a deffensive strategy. He cannot step it up and transition to offense.

Murray is the result of British and American marketing Machines. I was really disapointed when he started taking huge marketing contracts as its a signal that in his mind he has made it. Now he has got so much expectation riding on him people are stating he will win slams left and right and be #1 when we have 2 of the most dominant players of the last 20 years at the top. One in Nadal who I believe is the greatest player in tennis in terms of focus, concentration, and overall mental stength............. and the other in Federer who is the most skilled players in terms of movement and stoke technique. And then people start talking about Djoker, Murray, And Delpo dethrowning them and dominating tennis.......get real.


I am not fanboys of Fed and Nadal. My favorite players really have nothing to do with what they have acomplished. I like certain players for the type of people they are. Guys like Edberg, Rafter, Ivo, Rios.

brithater
01-23-2010, 12:06 PM
Yep, he has shown a better balance so far, but he was never going to be remotely threatened by the players he has beaten so far. The proof will be in that eagerly anticipated QF with Nadal, which I really hope we will get. He will really need to mix things up and take some risks if he is to win that match.

However, I still fear that he will play in this fashion in his next matches with Federer, Del Potro, Roddick etc...and he is more likely to be on the receiving end if he does so.

Its always funny when he plays Nadal because he actually does the right things. Its like everything becomes clear to him. He takes his chances and is aggresive when he needs to be. Why? Could be that Nadals weopons dont really scare him.

With this Tournament I would really like to see him play Davydenko in the finals. Then we will see how good of mover he is. Davydenkos game is the ultimate movement test for players. Even Federer is claiming how good his movement is this tourny but I wont believe it until I see him play Davydenko.

I will say Murrays movement has gotten a lot better and that overall has helped his defensive game greatly However.....because its help him play better defense it has regressed his willingness to take chances and be offensive more. Once a player develops a defensive mindset in his heart it is very, very tough to change. Murrays entire game is based around counterpunching. Same with Hewitt, Nadal, Change etc. etc. Federers game is based around an offensive mindset...he just learn to play percentages with it.

Horatio Caine
01-23-2010, 12:21 PM
That's assuming he can get past Isner. The Murray serve is pretty fragile when his percentage drops, and Big John won't be donating too many service games. History tells us that Murray is due a brainfart right about now, so a match with Nadal is still a big if, at least as far as I'm concerned.

Sure, no question that Isner could hurt him considerably...but as long as Muzza gets 1 of the first two sets I think he'll be fine. Potentially, I could see this match being a little like his struggle with Kendrick at Wimbledon last year.

Nadal is by no means a certainty either, but he plays the big points exceptionally well and I think that would be difference if that match goes as tight as it could. Besides, I'm thinking that Karlovic might not peak for the match...has been known to go into his shell in these situations, and there is extra pressure for his serve to be at its best against a returner like Nadal. Pressure that I think wouldn't affect Isner in the same way.

Vida
01-23-2010, 12:39 PM
Isner might take a set but thats it.

malisha
01-23-2010, 12:58 PM
http://www.zboriste.com/Smileys/classic/predjo.gif

Duncan
01-23-2010, 01:00 PM
Some of the comments on here about who having the easiest draw is just hilarious! You can only beat what is put infront of you and if people bottle it against lesser players that is no fault of the big guys.


On paper i see this game being no trouble for Andy but he did mention his stiff back after beating Serra and that is recipe for disaster. He did the same last year after cruising through the early rounds then he mentioned his virus before playing Verdasco. It's like he already has the excuse ready to use now. If he is losing this game in the 3rd or 4th set ill be watching for him going for his back after every point.


On another note i think he is taking things incredibly easy at the moment and it's like he is saving his energy for the 2nd week which could be a good thing.


I expect Andy to take this in 3 sets with the only chance of Isner taking a set is on a TB.

jcempire
01-23-2010, 02:11 PM
That was easy


Murray is going to get the title......We all knew it already....

This Murray is different..... He is better than last year..... AND He probably play his best tennis now....

So...6-4 6-3 7-5 Easily

angry1
01-23-2010, 03:30 PM
nope. Its a flawed motion. He falls on it and hits it on the way down giving him less clearance than someone who explodes up into the ball ala Federer, Jokovich, Roddick, etc etc. Delpotro stays up more and also has the hieght advantage. His motion is flawed in that his range of motion is not fully developed. If he fixes that....watch out. Nadal is hard to say because he has like three different motions he uses but he does exploded up into the ball unlike Murray.

Murray has a Flawed motion and always will. The only way he will get his percentages up will be through takeing pace off the ball. His second serve will never be top quality either for the same reasons. He does have a nice backhand though. Good rotation and a Strong Right arm that extends through his contact zone very well. Forehand is Average. Movement is good but nothing monumental reguardless of what madia says. Volleys are solid. Hes basically a scrapper with a really good backhand ansd everything else is OK. He is good at covering weaknesses in his game though and thats a big reason he gets the wins.

Dont be fooled by my nickname because it has nothing to do with Scotts or British tennis players in general. When I look at players I am completely objective whether I like them or not. I think Fed is a complete jerk but has an incredible work ethic and game. I pretty much just look at the physical and mental side of players. Likeability is not a big deal for me. Rios was one of my favorites and he was an asshole.

The problem I have with Murray is that what people say is simply not true. The sooner he comes to terms with it the sooner he will have some big results.

He is not the best mover on tour

He is not the smartest player on tour- far from it

He is not a very versitile player

What is true is that people will spin Murrays ability like no other player I have seen. He does not adapt well when he is in mid match and tactics need to be changed. Unlike DJokavich he does not have an a game to go toe to toe with a hot big hitting opponent. So if he is ever is going to be in the realm of #1 or whatever he needs to be an extremely good tactical player. Utilzing strengths and knowing when to be aggresive and when to force errors. Any changes he makes in matches are modifications to a deffensive strategy. He cannot step it up and transition to offense.

Murray is the result of British and American marketing Machines. I was really disapointed when he started taking huge marketing contracts as its a signal that in his mind he has made it. Now he has got so much expectation riding on him people are stating he will win slams left and right and be #1 when we have 2 of the most dominant players of the last 20 years at the top. One in Nadal who I believe is the greatest player in tennis in terms of focus, concentration, and overall mental stength............. and the other in Federer who is the most skilled players in terms of movement and stoke technique. And then people start talking about Djoker, Murray, And Delpo dethrowning them and dominating tennis.......get real.


I am not fanboys of Fed and Nadal. My favorite players really have nothing to do with what they have acomplished. I like certain players for the type of people they are. Guys like Edberg, Rafter, Ivo, Rios.


Doesn't the bold bit of the 1st post contradict much of the second post?

Also the bold bit in the second seems redolent of prejudice and nothing much else.

Overall you seem so anti-Murray that you flail around sometimes hitting(poor forehand,stubborn) and sometimes not,but if you want people to value your views try to adjust them for your bias which clearly leaks through.

Sham Kay
01-23-2010, 03:57 PM
That was easy


Murray is going to get the title......We all knew it already....

This Murray is different..... He is better than last year..... AND He probably play his best tennis now....

So...6-4 6-3 7-5 Easily

This looks suspiciously like those comments trying to curse him :worship:

Those were at the forefront of murray threads back in USO 2009 :devil:

ronpon
01-23-2010, 07:08 PM
As a Scot and sometime tennis fan I am bewildered by Andy Murray's performances. They seem to go from the sublime to the ridiculous; he seems to have the talent but not always the belief. In front of the TV my family laugh at me when I shout that he needs to be more aggressive than the "pusher" style he seems to adopt, especially after he wins the first set! What's that all about? It seeems to be more in his head than anything else.

saniapower
01-23-2010, 07:11 PM
Murray in 3

brithater
01-23-2010, 07:19 PM
Doesn't the bold bit of the 1st post contradict much of the second post?

Also the bold bit in the second seems redolent of prejudice and nothing much else.

Overall you seem so anti-Murray that you flail around sometimes hitting(poor forehand,stubborn) and sometimes not,but if you want people to value your views try to adjust them for your bias which clearly leaks through.


Wrong. Would not be unhappy to see Murray win a slam at all. I have a bit of Scott blood myself. Just want to see him maximize his potential and I think he is stalled in terms of improving since last years Aussie as a result of some really poor decisions and arrogance.

angry1
01-23-2010, 07:21 PM
Wrong. Would not be unhappy to see Murray win a slam at all. I have a bit of Scott blood myself. Just want to see him maximize his potential and I think he is stalled in terms of improving since last years Aussie.

I'd agree with that but I would attribute it to a lack not a surfeit of self belief.

brithater
01-23-2010, 07:30 PM
I think the way he approaches the clay court season hurts him every year. Its like he changes his style of play to a straight clay courter and then cannot transition back to a more aggresive style for Wimby. Very few players in history have been able to do that. Fed and Borg is about it.

angry1
01-23-2010, 07:38 PM
I think the way he approaches the clay court season hurts him every year. Its like he changes his style of play to a straight clay courter and then cannot transition back to a more aggresive style for Wimby. Very few players in history have been able to do that. Fed and Borg is about it.

I think he really believed that he'd win last year's Aussie and blowing it(or having ill health blow it)has sent him further into his comfort zone.

Having a mediocre rather than as previously a dreadful clay season probably did make that worse.

Whenever he says something positive recently it hasn't rung true to me.

Mechlan
01-23-2010, 07:47 PM
I think he really believed that he'd win last year's Aussie and blowing it(or having ill health blow it)has sent him further into his comfort zone.

Having a mediocre rather than as previously a dreadful clay season probably did make that worse.

Whenever he says something positive recently it hasn't rung true to me.

The benefit of under-performing is that you start to fly under the radar a bit and he certainly could do with that.

Lopez
01-23-2010, 09:06 PM
If Murray falls in the defensive mindset he tends to have against people who are less consistent than him on the baseline he might lose if Isner performs well and attacks the net (and covers the CC pass for christ sake, almost no one does it against Murray even though he passes 99% CC).

However Murray should make enough returns and run down enough balls for Isner to make the mistake and lose. I predict Murray in 4 sets (like many, I'd like a Murray/Nadal QF!).

About Murray's serve, his motion is ok IMO but technique is not (by motion I mean the aesthetics of the shot and technique the execution itself). The second serve would be better if his technique were better. He should serve the first with more spin to really get the feel for the second. See Federer or Roddick, the second serve is very similar to the first and actually they are the same shot "the serve", with different variations. That's the mindset that good servers have. Now, they're different shots for Murray (Nieminen is similar, also Del Potro but he gets away with the same because he's so tall). I've written about this a few times, getting tired of repeating myself :D.

scoobs
01-23-2010, 09:53 PM
Andy is overly keen on the very flat serve down the T or out wide which means that when he's not finding the spots, his first serve % can be atrocious. He does have the other serves but he often neglects to introduce them.

bad gambler
01-23-2010, 10:07 PM
Murray is going to get more balls in play than any other opponent Long John Isner has faced in the past 2 weeks, completely different quality in service return. Anything other than a straight sets win will be suprising with at least a break in each set.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 10:35 PM
If Big John wins, I win £100.

It's a nice backup in the event that Murray loses.

bad gambler
01-23-2010, 10:39 PM
If Big John wins, I win £100.

It's a nice backup in the event that Murray loses.

I wish you had donated that money to the Haiti relief than to your bookie :o

Time for Murray to show some balls in the second week of a slam and win the damn event. It's his for the taking.

Lopez
01-23-2010, 10:39 PM
Andy is overly keen on the very flat serve down the T or out wide which means that when he's not finding the spots, his first serve % can be atrocious. He does have the other serves but he often neglects to introduce them.

The slice serve isn't really that difficult to master. My point is that people mistakenly talk about second and first serves separately, as if they were a totally different stroke.

The real difference is much more subtle. Great servers have very similar first and second serves, because they are essentially the same stroke, only with different spin (i.e. forehand with different spin, as opposed to forehand vs backhand).

Ertl93
01-23-2010, 10:43 PM
Isner in 5.

kaylee
01-23-2010, 10:45 PM
Hmm this is a difficult one - sad to admit that probably Murray will win.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 10:45 PM
I wish you had donated that money to the Haiti relief than to your bookie :o

Time for Murray to show some balls in the second week of a slam and win the damn event. It's his for the taking.

Murray likes to brainfart in the 4th round of majors. I'm not taking any chances. If he wins, great. If he doesn't, I get a decent payout. :D

Andi-M
01-23-2010, 11:02 PM
I hope you lose your money Clydey.

angry1
01-23-2010, 11:03 PM
The slice serve isn't really that difficult to master. My point is that people mistakenly talk about second and first serves separately, as if they were a totally different stroke.

The real difference is much more subtle. Great servers have very similar first and second serves, because they are essentially the same stroke, only with different spin (i.e. forehand with different spin, as opposed to forehand vs backhand).

Funnily enough I asked someone whether that difference in action was why when he's serving well he looks very good,but once his 1st serve% drops it takes ages to recover if at all.

Do you think he can add to that% without significantly lowering his 1st winning%?

Personally I would stick with it as it is and hope for a lucky streak late in a major,without expecting much general improvement.

Clydey
01-23-2010, 11:09 PM
I hope you lose your money Clydey.

Me too.

yesyesok
01-23-2010, 11:10 PM
I don't know if anybody is watching this on the BBC in Britain but the commentry is awful. Within 30 seconds they had already told me Murray is the main man in Melbourne (em Federer Nadal Djokovic Hewitt Roddick Del Potro Davydenko etc etc) and that Murray is the number 4 seed.

I wish these clowns would check their facts.

Xystim
01-23-2010, 11:17 PM
I think Murray will win, it will be a hard one though. Andy Murray is playing pretty good so far in this tournament, his only weakness is his serve so far. Murray in 3 sets, although those sets will be very close.

Roamed
01-23-2010, 11:20 PM
I don't know if anybody is watching this on the BBC in Britain but the commentry is awful. Within 30 seconds they had already told me Murray is the main man in Melbourne (em Federer Nadal Djokovic Hewitt Roddick Del Potro Davydenko etc etc) and that Murray is the number 4 seed.

I wish these clowns would check their facts.

Tell me about it, ugh. And nothing against Murray personally but the overhyping in previous years ... it's almost as if they're trying to make me dislike him, which isn't fair on the guy himself but it's what it makes me feel. Not been too bad so far this tournament but then again I haven't tuned in to more than bits of his matches. For sure he's a main contender but there's a line, which they cross every now and then.

vamosinator
01-23-2010, 11:35 PM
Experts are fooled by Murray's regular demolition of crap, though ironically he often loses to less than great opposition in slams anyway, so maybe Murray has no good reason to be hyped and its just a romantic thing? I can't tell with males, is Murray that good looking/charming?

Lopez
01-23-2010, 11:50 PM
Funnily enough I asked someone whether that difference in action was why when he's serving well he looks very good,but once his 1st serve% drops it takes ages to recover if at all.

Do you think he can add to that% without significantly lowering his 1st winning%?

Personally I would stick with it as it is and hope for a lucky streak late in a major,without expecting much general improvement.

The problem with the hoping strategy is that he gives up so much ground against aggressive players who like to attack the second serve.

He wouldn't really lower the winning percentage IMO because he would be giving different looks on his serve all the time... switching pace, placement and spin. And let's face it, you can hit aces without serving huge all the time... In fact, accuracy is most important and it's the spin that gives the serve its control. And if the serve is "merely" a service winner instead of an ace, let's face it: it's as good as one.

angry1
01-24-2010, 01:46 AM
The problem with the hoping strategy is that he gives up so much ground against aggressive players who like to attack the second serve.

He wouldn't really lower the winning percentage IMO because he would be giving different looks on his serve all the time... switching pace, placement and spin. And let's face it, you can hit aces without serving huge all the time... In fact, accuracy is most important and it's the spin that gives the serve its control. And if the serve is "merely" a service winner instead of an ace, let's face it: it's as good as one.

I'm confident my technical knowledge is much less than yours,but I'll just briefly clarify why I think hoping to get lucky is best.

1)He's been working hard on his serve with little gain for a while so I don't see significant improvement coming.

2)He is very poor beind a weak deepish return so the gain from an unrturned/ace is worth it due to the comparatively small edge he gains with a 1st serve that's returned vs a 2nd serve.

Lopez
01-24-2010, 01:57 AM
I'm confident my technical knowledge is much less than yours,but I'll just briefly clarify why I think hoping to get lucky is best.

1)He's been working hard on his serve with little gain for a while so I don't see significant improvement coming.

2)He is very poor beind a weak deepish return so the gain from an unrturned/ace is worth it due to the comparatively small edge he gains with a 1st serve that's returned vs a 2nd serve.

Sure, it's hard to learn the most difficult stroke in tennis once you've developed your game to the extent to which Andy has. So maybe it's not the most realistic way, however I'm confident that it's the way to go should he want to improve his second serve ("it" meaning working on his serving technique and mentality as a whole).

I haven't really follow Murray that much, maybe someone like Clydey can weigh in here, but if it really is true that he can't control a rally started by the first serve any better than by the second, then maybe it's worth it to just go for it... However, I feel that any pro will fancy their chances more after the first serve rather than the second one, even if the first serve is returned deep.

Thing is, if you play 100 serve points, winning e.g. 80% of first serve points, raising the percentage of first serves in by 10% will earn you 8 more points... That's 2 games.

angry1
01-24-2010, 02:12 AM
Sure, it's hard to learn the most difficult stroke in tennis once you've developed your game to the extent to which Andy has. So maybe it's not the most realistic way, however I'm confident that it's the way to go should he want to improve his second serve ("it" meaning working on his serving technique and mentality as a whole).

I haven't really follow Murray that much, maybe someone like Clydey can weigh in here, but if it really is true that he can't control a rally started by the first serve any better than by the second, then maybe it's worth it to just go for it... However, I feel that any pro will fancy their chances more after the first serve rather than the second one, even if the first serve is returned deep.

Thing is, if you play 100 serve points, winning e.g. 80% of first serve points, raising the percentage of first serves in by 10% will earn you 8 more points... That's 2 games.

It's my impression that he can't,but I'm always uncomfortable stating such things without stats to back me up.Murray is though I'm certain well below average off a nothing weak deepish return,and above average after a weak 2nd serve.

p.s where do you switch spell check on?

I'm a ropey speller and lousy typist not a good combination.

Lopez
01-24-2010, 02:15 AM
It's my impression that he can't,but I'm always uncomfortable stating such things without stats to back me up.Murray is though I'm certain well below average off a nothing weak deepish return,and above average after a weak 2nd serve.

p.s where do you switch spell check on?

I'm a ropey speller and lousy typist not a good combination.

Yeah it's hard to judge without proper stats, I agree :).

I wouldn't know about spellchecking, I don't have one :p. Maybe because I'm not a native speaker, spell checking becomes natural because of all the exams etc :D

angry1
01-24-2010, 02:21 AM
Yeah it's hard to judge without proper stats, I agree :).

I wouldn't know about spellchecking, I don't have one :p. Maybe because I'm not a native speaker, spell checking becomes natural because of all the exams etc :D

From now on I can't even claim that Gaelic is my first language as an excuse,then? Sod it.

Lopez
01-24-2010, 02:27 AM
From now on I can't even claim that Gaelic is my first language as an excuse,then? Sod it.

Well at least Gaelic is a cooler first language than Finnish :p. At least in my eyes :)

Clydey
01-24-2010, 03:00 AM
Sure, it's hard to learn the most difficult stroke in tennis once you've developed your game to the extent to which Andy has. So maybe it's not the most realistic way, however I'm confident that it's the way to go should he want to improve his second serve ("it" meaning working on his serving technique and mentality as a whole).

I haven't really follow Murray that much, maybe someone like Clydey can weigh in here, but if it really is true that he can't control a rally started by the first serve any better than by the second, then maybe it's worth it to just go for it... However, I feel that any pro will fancy their chances more after the first serve rather than the second one, even if the first serve is returned deep.

Thing is, if you play 100 serve points, winning e.g. 80% of first serve points, raising the percentage of first serves in by 10% will earn you 8 more points... That's 2 games.

That definitely used to be the case. If his opponent got the first serve back even to midcourt, Murray would allow his opponent to dictate. He's going for the one-two a bit more these days, though. Much happier to take on short balls off the first serve.

Lopez
01-24-2010, 03:10 AM
That definitely used to be the case. If his opponent got the first serve back even to midcourt, Murray would allow his opponent to dictate. He's going for the one-two a bit more these days, though. Much happier to take on short balls off the first serve.

Yeah well that's a positive direction. I mean there's more to the first serve than going for the ace... The control of the point is tactically an important thing. Also saves a ton of energy... But naturally I get the point that if Andy feels that he is on equal terms with a returned first serve than a returned second, then surely going for the service winner is smart. However, I feel that this is not the case, especially as of late since he's become a profile player and it is "known" in the locker room how you should play to beat him (much like Nadal... execution is a different story :p).

Well played today however, my guess was one set off!

gusavo
01-24-2010, 06:46 AM
The sooner he comes to terms with it the sooner he will have some big results.
why do you think you know better than him/his team

He is not the smartest player on tour- far from it
proof?

He is not a very versitile player
how

So if he is ever is going to be in the realm of #1 or whatever he needs to be an extremely good tactical player.
hes already been there, and is there.