What's going on with Murray (be serious please) [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What's going on with Murray (be serious please)

duong
03-28-2010, 03:29 PM
Like the thread about Djokovic, I think Murray needs a thread like that.

Here's what I think.

I think Murray has lost his bravery/courage.

He's really worked a lot in last two years : working physically, practising a lot, and playing with the aim of a game with "zero error".

This was a lot of work :shrug:

And yet he didn't achieve anything he wanted, at slams I mean, of course.

Then I think he's lost his bravery/courage, not able to give everything as he was in the beginning of 2009.

I think that's the main problem.

It reminds me of what many people have said about Nadal : worked a lot, yet stayed number 2, which might have made him lose his courage.

But first Nadal's mentality is of course different (he has a very solid and strong "fighting background" imo) and secondly, at least Nadal had one slam to win every year, in Roland-Garros.

Even Nadal had some moments of losing bravery (for instance when he cried after Wimbledon final in 2007), but he had Roland-Garros. And also he had the fact that he beat the number 1 more often than the number 1 beat him. That gives courage.

Of course some might also compare with Djokovic in the middle of 2008 losing courage after being beaten by Nadal several times, but Djokovic's current situation is imo much more complicated to understand.

I don't think Murray is as "brave" as Nadal, and he's lost some courage here.

Lightening his schedule without maybe any major justification other than some laziness, being less concentrated, making sometimes quite silly things ... it's like that.

Many speak about changing team (ie Todd Martin) for Djokovic but that may also be a good idea for Murray, as I think that in the long term, Murray needs to change his game to attack more, and it may be the right moment : now that he's lost bravery, it's not a good situation to keep on grinding again and again. He might do it on clay next months, but if he's lost bravery what can he win on clay like that ? Maybe he might skip Monte-Carlo and rather prepare for Wimbledon, practising a more attacking game.

I have the impression that McLagan has never encouraged him to play someway else.

I think he has to change something, both for his game and for his mental.

Action Jackson
03-28-2010, 03:30 PM
Knee jerk reaction.

duong
03-28-2010, 03:34 PM
Knee jerk reaction.

sorry, I'm not good enough at English to understand that :confused:

orangehat
03-28-2010, 03:36 PM
sorry, I'm not good enough at English to understand that :confused:

knee-jerk reaction means you react too much because something happened.

i.e. in this case he thinks that Murray losing a few matches doesn't mean anything much and doesn't warrant such a thread.

duong
03-28-2010, 03:39 PM
knee-jerk reaction means you react too much because something happened.

i.e. in this case he thinks that Murray losing a few matches doesn't mean anything much and doesn't warrant such a thread.

Ok thanks, anyway some people wonder about it, I guess.

I just say my impressions :shrug: I already had them in Indian Wells in his first matches

Winning or losing matches is not really my concern, but rather the way the player plays and comparing with what he has done in the past.

Action Jackson
03-28-2010, 03:45 PM
knee-jerk reaction means you react too much because something happened.

i.e. in this case he thinks that Murray losing a few matches doesn't mean anything much and doesn't warrant such a thread.

It's the classic MTF overreaction in a nutshell. Long way to go in the season.

Remember when Fed was finished, washed up and a total has been? Nalbandian's results are the classic MTF overreaction, he wins he is a genius, a hero and so talented, when he loses a fat piece of shit, who cares nothing about the game.

scoobs
03-28-2010, 03:46 PM
It's very simple.

Crisis of confidence.

Up until the point where the umpire called Game, Set and Match at the Australian Open final, Andy believed he had all the tools and the game necessary to win a Grand Slam.

Then he goes into the final with ideal preparation, and basically gets spanked.

And now he doubts himself.

Now he wonders whether he is good enough.

He's been insulated to all the criticisms from outside telling him to change his game for years, insulated by his own self-confidence.

Now that confidence has been punctured and it may take him some time to repair it.

orangehat
03-28-2010, 03:46 PM
It's the classic MTF overreaction in a nutshell. Long way to go in the season.

Remember when Fed was finished, washed up and a total has been? Nalbandian's results are the classic MTF overreaction, he wins he is a genius, a hero and so talented, when he loses a fat piece of shit, who cares nothing about the game.

true but the fact is that murray won't do shit in the clay season which means his "season" is now half a season. Add on to the fact that he won't win Wimbledon (pressure etc.) and there's only a quarter of his season left :shrug:

Action Jackson
03-28-2010, 03:50 PM
true but the fact is that murray won't do shit in the clay season which means his "season" is now half a season. Add on to the fact that he won't win Wimbledon (pressure etc.) and there's only a quarter of his season left :shrug:

He has made a GS final already and he has 2 other chances in the year to do it, therefore what he does there is more important than an early loss in a TMS event.

Indian Wells and Miami mean shit in the overall scheme of things. But yes he is washed up and has no chance of turning it around. Believe it or not, players do have the odd dips in form, even the good ones :)

Vida
03-28-2010, 03:51 PM
he got a 'weak era' disease.

Mateya
03-28-2010, 04:00 PM
Well, I think it's a bit early to ring the alarm bells yet.
The clay season is coming soon, we'll see what he does there, but he never liked clay too much so... :shrug:

Road to RG: do not expect too much - as long as he keeps beating out of top30 mugs it will be fine. Losing to some Almagro or Kohlschreiber shouldn't be too big shock. Making second week of RG will be a success. :cool:
However, he cannot affort losing to some random claycourt mug like Vassallo Arguello. :rolleyes:

Queen's and Wimbledon will tell us a lot more: if he loses 4-6 4-6 to Fish early in Queen's and/or loses before QF of Wimby, THEN you should be very concerned about him.
:wavey:

vn01
03-28-2010, 04:03 PM
Before the start of the season he said that he will give his best to win a slam.In Australia he was sooooo close.He made a perfect tournament,but his mental lability failed him.But he has to play his best on clay Masters,because he will NEVER win RG.I think that Murray will concentrate on winning Wimbledon.But he is not mental strong enough to win this

ExcaliburII
03-28-2010, 04:06 PM
Players are not afraid of him anymore. His game was always shit.

Puschkin
03-28-2010, 04:12 PM
In Australia he was sooooo close.
close??? :eek:

Certinfy
03-28-2010, 04:12 PM
He's tanking until Wimbledon where he can peak.

Jomp1
03-28-2010, 04:18 PM
It's all about confidence. His is down the crapper right now. But yes, he should really try to do something with the ball himself. He is throwing balls away without even trying to do anything with it.

Michael Bluth
03-28-2010, 04:21 PM
It's a combination of factors I think. The loss of confidence post-AO is definitely one, but another is that more players have started to figure out his game and exploit his passivity.

Vida
03-28-2010, 04:36 PM
It's a combination of factors I think. The loss of confidence post-AO is definitely one, but another is that more players have started to figure out his game and exploit his passivity.

exactly. all of this was foreseen long ago by the more knowledgeable posters.

CmonAussie
03-28-2010, 04:44 PM
...
...
Muzza won loads of tournies in 2008 & 2009- yet came up empty in the slams.! 2010 began promisingly, but defeat again at the hands of FED in a slam final [08 USO & 10 AO)>> has deflated MUZZA;_; He`s lost some motivation by not being able to pull of a major win yet.! ))Still he`s a good chance to win Wimby or USO this year, and if he can (a big "if") then he really might kick on to become #1

stebs
03-28-2010, 04:45 PM
IMO he played a very good Australian Open and got beaten by Federer giving the best GS performance he has given in the last few years. Perspective is easy for armchair fans, they can say with that play Murray is clearly capable of wining a slam, just not capable of beating an in form Federer (who is?). However, for Murray is has been more difficult, the slam hurdle is a big one and not getting over it has hurt his confidence.

I disagree with AJ that this is a kneww jerk reaction, I realise that duong you are not the type to make those kind of snap judgements. Rather this is an analysis of several poor performances and Murrayis not exhibiting his ability to cruise through weaker players that he developed so well a while back. However, I do still think the scars from losing that GS final are affecting him but I don't believe they will continue to do so for long. Murray is determined, he will get back to form and he will regain confidence in himself. When this will happen? Hard to say.

vn01
03-28-2010, 04:49 PM
close??? :eek:

Yes.Playing final and losing it.Isn't it close.But especially for the match-Federer DESTROYED him

Andi-M
03-28-2010, 05:02 PM
Post traumatic slam stress?

Priam
03-28-2010, 05:05 PM
Maybe there's an injury we don't know about.

Persimmon
03-28-2010, 05:06 PM
Murray realized that even when playing at his best it is not enough to beat Federer at a slam. Murray's best is not even enough to take a set off Fed at a slam. Before the AO final, Murray was convinced he would beat Fed and boy was Murray wrong. Very wrong. He is devastated. He is not good enough to beat Fed at the slams or even take sets off Fed at the slams.

marcRD
03-28-2010, 05:07 PM
Remember when Fed was finished, washed up and a total has been?

Murray is not Federer, he cant afford to play bad in these kind of tournaments. Murray can not even be a "has been", he would rather become a "has been that never was".

Johnny Groove
03-28-2010, 05:12 PM
He needs to be able to attack the short ball and (gasp!) close the net and (double gasp!) hit a winning volley.

People say the game is reverting to nothing more than baseline slugging/pushing, but I see the future of the game in players that are able to close the net when given the opportunity. I can't tell you how many times I've watched a match (especially a Murray match), a short ball is given, and the player merely strolls up to it and hits it cross court before retreating to the baseline :o

If Murray wants to win a slam and get to #1 (read: beat Nadal and Federer consistently in both slam and non-slam events) he needs to be able to close the net and hit a volley.

rocketassist
03-28-2010, 05:14 PM
To say lesser players have 'figured out' his game is the most wishful thinking shite in this thread.

He's playing poorly and going through a bad patch of play, and you can tell he's disheartened by the fact it was all set up for him to win the AO, three days rest, ready to face Fed, who played superb tennis, and he didn't get a set.

stebs
03-28-2010, 07:16 PM
To say lesser players have 'figured out' his game is the most wishful thinking shite in this thread.

:yeah: He's playing poorly right now and it still took very good displays to beat him from Tipsarevic, Soderling and Fish. They are all highly capable attacking players and they won fair and square. A lot of players know exactly how to play Murray and the three aforementioned guys are examples of that. However, whilst they played well, it also takes an out of form Murray to lose to them.

The idea that people only just found out how to approach a match with Murray considering he's been on tour for closing on five years is laughable.

pica_pica
03-28-2010, 07:32 PM
Like the thread about Djokovic, I think Murray needs a thread like that.

Here's what I think.

I think Murray has lost his bravery/courage.

He's really worked a lot in last two years : working physically, practising a lot, and playing with the aim of a game with "zero error".

This was a lot of work :shrug:

And yet he didn't achieve anything he wanted, at slams I mean, of course.

Then I think he's lost his bravery/courage, not able to give everything as he was in the beginning of 2009.

I think that's the main problem.

It reminds me of what many people have said about Nadal : worked a lot, yet stayed number 2, which might have made him lose his courage.

But first Nadal's mentality is of course different (he has a very solid and strong "fighting background" imo) and secondly, at least Nadal had one slam to win every year, in Roland-Garros.

Even Nadal had some moments of losing bravery (for instance when he cried after Wimbledon final in 2007), but he had Roland-Garros. And also he had the fact that he beat the number 1 more often than the number 1 beat him. That gives courage.

Of course some might also compare with Djokovic in the middle of 2008 losing courage after being beaten by Nadal several times, but Djokovic's current situation is imo much more complicated to understand.

I don't think Murray is as "brave" as Nadal, and he's lost some courage here.

Lightening his schedule without maybe any major justification other than some laziness, being less concentrated, making sometimes quite silly things ... it's like that.

Many speak about changing team (ie Todd Martin) for Djokovic but that may also be a good idea for Murray, as I think that in the long term, Murray needs to change his game to attack more, and it may be the right moment : now that he's lost bravery, it's not a good situation to keep on grinding again and again. He might do it on clay next months, but if he's lost bravery what can he win on clay like that ? Maybe he might skip Monte-Carlo and rather prepare for Wimbledon, practising a more attacking game.

I have the impression that McLagan has never encouraged him to play someway else.

I think he has to change something, both for his game and for his mental.
Good post. I don't like Murray much but with him sucking alongside Nole and in some way Rafa, it's no good for the game. Federer needs challengers for No.1 and at slams to make the sport interesting.

harrywang5
03-28-2010, 07:35 PM
He just doesn't have it.

Riosreigned
03-28-2010, 08:02 PM
Good post Duong I agree. Murray trained like a beast, he got into phenomenal condition and so much stronger than he previously was. But it did not result into any Grand Slam success and this disappointment could be bothering Murray now.

It reminds of the time Hingis trained super hard and made the final vs. Capriati in Australia and blew those four MPs, ended up losing the third set in that wicked heat. Hingis never again threatened for a slam major and her career slowly faded away. When an athlete gets into super shape like that and still fails, it's a tough pill to swallow. Doubt creeps in. Deep inside, they wonder if they really have what it takes. Murray is experiencing self doubt now. Those losses to Federer in slam finals have crushed his confidence. at least that's how I see it.

tangerine_dream
03-28-2010, 08:02 PM
It's very simple.

Crisis of confidence.

Up until the point where the umpire called Game, Set and Match at the Australian Open final, Andy believed he had all the tools and the game necessary to win a Grand Slam.

Then he goes into the final with ideal preparation, and basically gets spanked.

And now he doubts himself.

Now he wonders whether he is good enough.

He's been insulated to all the criticisms from outside telling him to change his game for years, insulated by his own self-confidence.

Now that confidence has been punctured and it may take him some time to repair it.
Murray didn't play anywhere near his best in the final. If he had played like he did vs Nadal he would've won. Roger wasn't playing all that great either.

scoobs
03-28-2010, 08:07 PM
Murray didn't play anywhere near his best in the final. If he had played like he did vs Nadal he would've won. Roger wasn't playing all that great either.
He didn't play his best, no. Neither did Roger, but Roger did play better, and he just handled Murray until that third set, which was a tussle.

Guga_fan
03-28-2010, 08:10 PM
Murray didn't play anywhere near his best in the final. If he had played like he did vs Nadal he would've won. Roger wasn't playing all that great either.
Federer doesn't moonball, there's no way to play with Federer like you play against Nadal. Murray could have played better, but I doubt he would win anyway.

swebright
03-28-2010, 08:18 PM
You tried, tried, tried and nothing happened ... then people start second-guessing/having doubts. When will I ever have a break???? They have played at a very high level for the past 2 years and still .....

Nadal stayed at #2 for ?3-4 years but he has the advantage over Fed so he has some incentives. And Nadal is a completely different player.

This Murray and Novak are very good players (but I feel like they are nothing special). They could have been multi slam winners if they don't "happen" in Fed-Nadal era. Not only they have 1 formidable player (eith Fed or Nadal), they have a combined force of 2 great players happening at the same time.

They can follow the story of Andy Roddick. Blame the bad timing. Or, blame Fed.

marcRD
03-28-2010, 08:20 PM
Murray didn't play anywhere near his best in the final. If he had played like he did vs Nadal he would've won. Roger wasn't playing all that great either.

That is silly, Federer doesnt give the balls for Murray to play like he did against Nadal. Murray cant win against Federer when Federer plays like he did in Australia or in the USOPEN final, he can barely get a set.

DJ Soup
03-28-2010, 08:38 PM
he must be thinking: "If Delpo could, why can't I?"

timafi
03-28-2010, 08:46 PM
Murray didn't play anywhere near his best in the final. If he had played like he did vs Nadal he would've won. Roger wasn't playing all that great either.

you need to get your damn head fixed before talking like that
Federer served well
his backhand was great
his forehand was great
he was using his drop shots well
he volleyed a few times with success
he moved superbly and wasn't having none of Murray junk balls

he whooped your boys ass;like he beat Roddick last year;just like Roddick;Murray has not recovered:tape:

stebs
03-28-2010, 09:01 PM
Roger wasn't playing all that great either.
:lol: Are you nuts? Great serving. Forehand was on top form, backhand was on top form. He was there mentally, he was quick and strong physically.

What are your standards for Federer? I don't think he played as well as he did in the AO final in a big match since 2007.

rocketassist
03-28-2010, 09:03 PM
:lol: Are you nuts? Great serving. Forehand was on top form, backhand was on top form. He was there mentally, he was quick and strong physically.

What are your standards for Federer? I don't think he played as well as he did in the AO final in a big match since 2007.

Exactly, Murray isn't winning if Fed plays his A game.

Noleta
03-28-2010, 09:07 PM
Federer doesn't moonball.

:lol:

Persimmon
03-28-2010, 09:18 PM
That is silly, Federer doesnt give the balls for Murray to play like he did against Nadal. Murray cant win against Federer when Federer plays like he did in Australia or in the USOPEN final, he can barely get a set.

This.

Nole fan
03-28-2010, 10:53 PM
It's very simple.

Crisis of confidence.

Up until the point where the umpire called Game, Set and Match at the Australian Open final, Andy believed he had all the tools and the game necessary to win a Grand Slam.

Then he goes into the final with ideal preparation, and basically gets spanked.

And now he doubts himself.

Now he wonders whether he is good enough.

He's been insulated to all the criticisms from outside telling him to change his game for years, insulated by his own self-confidence.

Now that confidence has been punctured and it may take him some time to repair it.

You just said it perfectly. :yeah:
I think Novak's problem is deeper than that. Murray not yet there.

Mechlan
03-29-2010, 12:26 AM
He's going through a bad patch, fallen off a bit mentally because of the AO loss. The real concern should set in if he's still playing poorly come Wimbledon.

Just hope the he realizes that he's got to mix in some more aggressive play to consistently be there the final weekend challenging for slams. If he does that, his time will come.

he must be thinking: "If Delpo could, why can't I?"

More like why didn't Federer play against me like he did against Delpo. :lol:

rocketassist
03-29-2010, 12:46 AM
More like why didn't Federer play against me like he did against Delpo. :lol:

This. FedError turned up in NY and his groundies were shit and full of shanks. Had he played like that at the AO, Murray would have won.

Arkulari
03-29-2010, 12:47 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1261390/Andy-Murray-worry-admits-Ive-fallen-love-tennis.html#ixzz0jVd049gn

Andy Murray worry as he admits: I've fallen out of love with tennis

By Mike Dickson Tennis Correspondent reports from Miami

Last updated at 11:58 PM on 28th March 2010

The eyes looked slightly moist and the head was hung low. Never before has Andy Murray appeared such a picture of despondency as he was in the wake of Saturday night's defeat at the Sony Ericsson Open.

And later came the startling revelation that he has, for the moment, fallen out of love with the game that is his life.

'I need to start enjoying my tennis again. This has been going on for a few weeks now,' he admitted after losing 6-4, 6-4 to Mardy Fish.

So to add to the list of woes currently afflicting British tennis, such as Davis Cup humiliations and parliamentary hearings about the sport's administration, there is now turmoil in the mind of the country's one genuine championship contender.

This is all quite a turnaround. For a fleeting few weeks 12 months ago when he won the title here and Roger Federer was in meltdown, Murray was being acclaimed as the best player in the world.

Less than two months ago he looked to be an honourable second best, having lost out in the final of the Australian Open to a completely restored Federer.

Yet on Saturday against Fish, albeit a dangerous early round opponent, he was unrecognisable.

The consistently short forehand seemed to be that of a humble journeyman, while his appalling body language was that of someone who would rather have been anywhere than defending a major title against a player ranked 101 in the world.

In deeply pensive mood later on, third seed Murray, who received a first-round bye, assured everyone that there were no hidden problems in the background. He said: 'I've been very happy off the court but just not on it, and that's where I need to be happy because that's my career, this is what I do. It's only me who can figure it out.

People think sportsmen are different to other people but we're not - we all go through bad patches. I've got to get back to how I felt in Australia at the start of the season.'

Murray was emphatic that his malaise, which has seen him win just two of five completed matches since Melbourne, is not down to any profound reassessment since losing to Federer.And he also stressed that he is happy with the team around him.

It is fair to speculate, however, that his fortunes mirroring those of the British game might not be entire coincidence. His performances and those of Elena Baltacha and Laura Robson gave cause for much optimism in January, but that has largely been washed away.

Murray has been constantly asked about British tennis of late, and was doubtless hurt by John Lloyd's retrospective bitching about his non-participation in the recent Davis Cup debacle.

There was even a polite request last week from his handlers that questions on the subject be given a rest.

Every time the ongoing crisis within the British game comes to the fore, it can only be a reminder to Murray of the pressures associated with being the one serious hope from the country which hosts Wimbledon. This adds considerably to his marketability and wealth, but it is an onerous position to be in.

Clearly, there is also a debate in his head and around his team about whether the essentially counter-punching style that is his instinct is ever going to be quite enough to land him one of the sport's major prizes.

He tried out a more attacking mode at the recent Dubai Championships and not only did he lose in the second round, but he was also given an official rebuke for openly stating - not very tactfully - that he had been experimenting and defeat there was not the end of the world. 'Maybe it is just something to do with my game,' he ventured.

This is a good time for the European clay court season to arrive, as it is the one time of year when Murray does not have to contend with especially high expectations. There is now a good chance that he will add next month's Monte Carlo Open to his schedule as an early exit here means extra time to prepare for the dirt.

Top-ranked Federer held every service game and won his opening match by beating Nicolas Lapentti 6-3, 6-3.

Federer, the champion in 2005-06, has an inviting path to the final with Murray now out because world No 2 Novak Djokovic was eliminated on Friday.

Rafael Nadal will now overtake Murray for the world No 3 spot in the next set of rankings, while Fish advances to the third round of this event for the first time since 2003.

Midnight Ninja
03-29-2010, 12:53 AM
Murray has been constantly asked about British tennis of late, and was doubtless hurt by John Lloyd's retrospective bitching about his non-participation in the recent Davis Cup debacle.

I couldn't read further than that. How can any "news" organization use the term "retrospective bitching" (however true it may be).

stebs
03-29-2010, 12:54 AM
Some of the media in the country I call home beggars belief. How they manage to extract that headline out of what Murray actually said is anyones guess.

decrepitude
03-29-2010, 01:01 AM
Now come on, it was the Daily Mail after all. Rubbish headlines are the norm.

Sunset of Age
03-29-2010, 01:02 AM
I'm actually starting to feel sorry for Da Muzza again, after reading that sh*t from the media. :(
Muzza, I'm not your fan, but for the sake of the sport, man-up again! :hug:

Action Jackson
03-29-2010, 01:26 AM
Exactly, Murray isn't winning if Fed plays his A game.

Not many are.

Action Jackson
03-29-2010, 01:37 AM
I disagree with AJ that this is a kneww jerk reaction, I realise that duong you are not the type to make those kind of snap judgements. Rather this is an analysis of several poor performances and Murrayis not exhibiting his ability to cruise through weaker players that he developed so well a while back. However, I do still think the scars from losing that GS final are affecting him but I don't believe they will continue to do so for long. Murray is determined, he will get back to form and he will regain confidence in himself. When this will happen? Hard to say.

We will never agree on anything and that's good :) Yes, it is too early to start this sort of thread, at least with the Djokovic one there are greater reasons for it and it has been a long term problem.

What player has not gone through a down period in their career? Two TMS events after a Slam is too early to start this line.

Arkulari
03-29-2010, 01:56 AM
you forget Dubai as well AJ ;)

paseo
03-29-2010, 01:57 AM
Murray should just quit tennis and become a professional gamer.

Action Jackson
03-29-2010, 01:58 AM
you forget Dubai as well AJ ;)

MM event.

elessar
03-29-2010, 01:59 AM
Someone read too much Simon Reed :spit:
when he won the title here and Roger Federer was in meltdown, Murray was being acclaimed as the best player in the world.

elessar
03-29-2010, 02:01 AM
Some of the media in the country I call home beggars belief. How they manage to extract that headline out of what Murray actually said is anyones guess.
Best part is how they word it as if it's a direct quote :worship:

Arkulari
03-29-2010, 02:01 AM
MM event.

I know, but he was winning those with his eyes closed last year, after all, best of three are his thing ;)

dylan24
03-29-2010, 02:04 AM
fed shattered his confidence in australian open final.
murray will never win a slam.
this is a fact

swebright
03-29-2010, 02:07 AM
may be he got mono? mental and physical fatigue. Go get tested Andy.

And that british press is an overkill.

marcRD
03-29-2010, 02:59 AM
We will never agree on anything and that's good :) Yes, it is too early to start this sort of thread, at least with the Djokovic one there are greater reasons for it and it has been a long term problem.

What player has not gone through a down period in their career? Two TMS events after a Slam is too early to start this line.

If you take out Australian open Murray has been in a down period since he lost to Cilic in USOPEN last year, Djokovic actually had a good indoor season atleast.

It is quite obvious to anyone that Murray is having troubles with his head and motivation, another beatdown by Federer in another grand slam final just meant a paradigm shift for Murray, I think Murray became uncertain if he can win a grand slam playing his game, before he thought he had a legitimate shot challenging Federer for grand slams, now he isnt certain about anything in his career.

You can compare this one to Roddick losing the Wimbledon final 2004, Hewitt losing USOPEN 2004, Agassi losing USOPEN 1995. When you finaly come to terms that a specific rival is miles ahead of you when it matters, it causes a paradigm shift where you no longer know what to do with your game and feel uncertain about your potential and the future ahead. This can lead to a player starting to dig holes for himself or simply not beeing able to make progress anymore, I am quite certain Murray wont get out of this hole in a while but you can call it a knee jerk reaction if you want.

Anyway feel free to bookmark this, because I predict Murray wont:

1.End in the top 4 this year
2.Get to another grand slam final
3.Win a master series where he has to play Federer.

jadey
03-29-2010, 03:47 AM
fed shattered his confidence in australian open final.
murray will never win a slam.
this is a fact

Nastradamus has spoken

-Valhalla-
03-29-2010, 04:52 AM
He's still brooding over the beatdown at AO ... the "Federer Effect".

He'll get over it eventually.

Arkulari
03-29-2010, 05:07 AM
yep, he's passing through the same Duck did last year after Wimbledon

Mechlan
03-29-2010, 05:25 AM
I think Murray's case is pretty clear. He's just lost some confidence and motivation, which is expected after you give it your all and still come up short. Fortunately for him, he has plenty of positives to take from the tournament. Obviously Federer was playing very well and if one of the greatest ever plays close to their best on a big occasion to beat you, well, too good. There are still three slams left this year, and he has a great shot at two of them. Of late, Federer playing well in slam finals has not been the rule, it has been the exception. This is just the start of his career, no reason to think there won't be other opportunities. And plenty of other players have taken hits like this, including Federer, and come back strong, so it's not the end of the world. Personally I would find this an easy loss to recover from, but we'll see if he does.

Action Jackson
03-29-2010, 06:05 AM
If you take out Australian open Murray has been in a down period since he lost to Cilic in USOPEN last year, Djokovic actually had a good indoor season atleast.

It is quite obvious to anyone that Murray is having troubles with his head and motivation, another beatdown by Federer in another grand slam final just meant a paradigm shift for Murray, I think Murray became uncertain if he can win a grand slam playing his game, before he thought he had a legitimate shot challenging Federer for grand slams, now he isnt certain about anything in his career.

You can compare this one to Roddick losing the Wimbledon final 2004, Hewitt losing USOPEN 2004, Agassi losing USOPEN 1995. When you finaly come to terms that a specific rival is miles ahead of you when it matters, it causes a paradigm shift where you no longer know what to do with your game and feel uncertain about your potential and the future ahead. This can lead to a player starting to dig holes for himself or simply not beeing able to make progress anymore, I am quite certain Murray wont get out of this hole in a while but you can call it a knee jerk reaction if you want.

Anyway feel free to bookmark this, because I predict Murray wont:

1.End in the top 4 this year
2.Get to another grand slam final
3.Win a master series where he has to play Federer.

You wrote a lot of that, when you could just have said that Murray can't beat Federer in a big match.

The indoor season last year is irrelevant.

harrywang5
03-29-2010, 06:29 AM
"And I know, I may end up failing too, and I know you'll be just like me with another person disappointed in you."

Linkin Park said it best, Murray. You don't have it. Federer just steals the souls of players and makes them sin. Nalbandian drowned himself in food and was never the same. Bagdhatis got involved in ethnic conflicts in majors. Roddick became a porn addict. Djokovic is too afraid to leave his yacht every morning. Blake closes his eyes now before he hits the ball and grips it tighter. Agassi turned to meth and wearing women's wigs. And Nadal is still digging for gold in his pants.

Getta
03-29-2010, 06:51 AM
in truth, could be nowhere near the truth, which is better than nothing.

duong
03-29-2010, 11:58 AM
I didn't read the answers but I realized afterwards that I hadn't said what let me think that about Murray's game :

one year ago, you could expect a game of zero error from him, esp in the important moments.

Now, and even in Australia to say what I think, it seems that it's harder for him to play that game of zero error.

He makes far more errors, like not fully involved/concentrated.

Djokovic has many moments when he loses concentration, but quite many times this year when he really had to, he was able to bring back the ball again and again, playing a point with zero error.

Murray has lost that ability.

That's mainly what makes me think that. As if he was tired himself about playing that game, cannot suffer anymore the huge efforts which that game requires.

stebs
03-29-2010, 12:59 PM
It will be interesting to see if Murray is capable of rebooting his confidence after those defeats. Whilst they aren't going to be important in the grand scheme of things (i.e his career), there is some relevance. Murray obviously cares about his ranking and actually having disappointing results in a bunch of 1000 events will cause him problems ranking wise if he doesn't start to play better very soon.

Hewitt =Legend
03-29-2010, 01:17 PM
Love these premature threads about a players decline in form. Every player goes through a rough patch, its just what happens, you can't expect to play your best all the time. He'll have an improved clay season and then be back raring to go for Wimbledon, just relax.

kindling
03-29-2010, 02:37 PM
He's probably playing like crap for the same reason that his girlfriend broke up with him several months back. Apparently all the guy does is play video games in his free time.

duong
03-29-2010, 03:39 PM
I've read the thread now,

and nobody or nearly reacted about my main point : the fact that imo, the player looks lazier/less able to play a game of zero error.

Some reactions on the mode "knee jerk reaction" and "it's too early" and so on :rolleyes: WTF the topic is not "the player is washed out forever" come on ! :lol:

The topic about Djokovic is not yet about "he's washed forever" imo or if it is supposed for that, I think it's stupid :rolleyes:

Of course Murray will bounce back, there's no doubt, Djokovic as well, the topic imo was "what's going on" ... I mean now not forever :rolleyes:

The topic "Federer has broken his confidence forever" THAT's the overreaction imo.

I didn't mean that.

As I said, even in Australia, I saw him making some errors which he didn't make one year before.

Yes he had some lovely attacking game, esp against Nadal, but he also made more unforced errors than last year, and not because of attacking : it was, imo, laziness or lack of concentration.

I think he has a momentary laziness : momentary, yes ... BUT it's an indication imo that he's not made for a patience/without error game forever, as some players are made for that :shrug:

In the long run, it's better if your game fits your mentality : it's better in the long run.

I think Murray's problem is temporary ... but may also be an indication that he's not brave enough to play that game forever.

That's where the comparison with Nadal lies imo, Nadal or some other Spanish "grinders" by the way.

That's basically what I say : it seems that nobody reacted about that :shrug:

"confidence" "confidence" that's the magic word for tennis experts and amateurs ... but well there can be many different realities behind this word ! many different games and mentalities.

A player who usually attacks may lack confidence at the moment when he hits his attacks. That may be called more easily "confidence". Or your confidence is broken in your serve like Djokovic.

But a player who doesn't attack and yet makes the error, as does Murray sometimes now, in my opinion it's not exactly the same topic.

There can be many different realities behind that magic "confidence" word.

Persimmon
03-29-2010, 03:55 PM
Anyway feel free to bookmark this, because I predict Murray wont:

1.End in the top 4 this year
2.Get to another grand slam final
3.Win a master series where he has to play Federer.

Agreed. Murray has the AO finalist jinx now. Only players to not get jinxed are Fed and Pete.:o

R.Federer
03-29-2010, 05:46 PM
LTA today: "There is often more spin out of Roehampton than a Rafa Nadal forehand" :haha:

xargon
03-29-2010, 05:59 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/mar/29/andy-murray-miami-masters-defeat

marcRD
03-29-2010, 06:07 PM
You wrote a lot of that, when you could just have said that Murray can't beat Federer in a big match.


That is not what I wrote, what I wrote was that the knowledge Murray got from the AO final, that he cant beat Federer in a big match caused a paradigm shift where all of a sudden he understood (what many understood a long time ago) that his game is not effective to win slams, he now understood the limitations of his game and this has caused a crisis in confidence for Murray where he is having motivational problems, problems with concentration and the future is unclear to him. To be a good pusher you need to be 100% concentrated and motivated in every match, this is impossible for Murray by now.

We all knew Murray couldnt beat Federer in a big match, but now he knows it aswell. This has caused the crisis in his game we are now witnessing.

rocketassist
03-29-2010, 06:29 PM
That is not what I wrote, what I wrote was that the knowledge Murray got from the AO final, that he cant beat Federer in a big match caused a paradigm shift where all of a sudden he understood (what many understood a long time ago) that his game is not effective to win slams, he now understood the limitations of his game and this has caused a crisis in confidence for Murray where he is having motivational problems, problems with concentration and the future is unclear to him. To be a good pusher you need to be 100% concentrated and motivated in every match, this is impossible for Murray by now.

We all knew Murray couldnt beat Federer in a big match, but now he knows it aswell. This has caused the crisis in his game we are now witnessing.

His game was fine at the AO and he certainly wasn't pushing.

marcRD
03-29-2010, 06:34 PM
His game was fine at the AO and he certainly wasn't pushing.

He was pushing for most of the Federer match and was pushing against Cilic until Cilic got tired. Murray never pushes against Nadal, because you just cant push against Nadal so that match didnt surprise me at all.

Vida
03-29-2010, 06:37 PM
oh he was pushing alright.

pica_pica
03-29-2010, 07:00 PM
I'm actually starting to feel sorry for Da Muzza again, after reading that sh*t from the media. :(
Muzza, I'm not your fan, but for the sake of the sport, man-up again! :hug:
+1 :o Feel the same. Media people always deserve to be smashed. I guess unfair press-related criticism, pressure, expectation, hype and even maybe insult are what bring Nole and Murray down, in different times of their careers.

DualMedia
03-29-2010, 07:17 PM
murray needs kim back in his life , maybe that will help.

I♥PsY@Mus!c
03-29-2010, 07:40 PM
Probably because he still can't figure out the way to win a slam.He will be 23 this year.Many top players won before this age.(like Federer and Nadal)And he now lacks motivation after pushing himself too hard and having to suffer the loss at Slam.Only he can save himself.Yep it's very hard to win GS with Federer still playing.In the past I thought he NO DOUBT will win GS but it's tougher and tougher now,even I am not that sure he will...it's heartbroken to see a young player who tries their best but can't reach his goal, :sad: got spanked in the final again and again.He has to be patient,change his game and trust himself.It's easy to say these things,just hope he can do it. Hope he will be the next Goran. :)

Vida
03-29-2010, 07:41 PM
wonder ho murray 'gets by' these days, without kim :shrug:... havent heard he found any other girlfriend.

rocketassist
03-29-2010, 08:40 PM
He was pushing for most of the Federer match and was pushing against Cilic until Cilic got tired. Murray never pushes against Nadal, because you just cant push against Nadal so that match didnt surprise me at all.

Cilic was on fire first set and dominated the points because of the way he was playing, not Murray 'letting him'.

As for Fed, we'll disagree, at times he was, other times he had a go, but how is he expected to beat Roger if both are being aggressive?

oh he was pushing alright.

You're a bigger bullshitter than my ex-girlfriend, so I'm not going to bother with this.

marcRD
03-29-2010, 08:55 PM
As for Fed, we'll disagree, at times he was, other times he had a go, but how is he expected to beat Roger if both are being aggressive?



Nadal is more aggressive than Murray when he plays Federer on hardcourt/grass, I dont think you can win against Federer in important matches played on fast courts by letting him be on the driving seat.

Vida
03-29-2010, 09:57 PM
Cilic was on fire first set and dominated the points because of the way he was playing, not Murray 'letting him'.

As for Fed, we'll disagree, at times he was, other times he had a go, but how is he expected to beat Roger if both are being aggressive?



You're a bigger bullshitter than my ex-girlfriend, so I'm not going to bother with this.

another senseless post from you. frankly, Im not disappointed at all.

and yeah, I think I might get along your ex just fine. who knows, maybe I did :eek:

gusavo
03-29-2010, 09:57 PM
It's very simple.

Crisis of confidence.

Up until the point where the umpire called Game, Set and Match at the Australian Open final, Andy believed he had all the tools and the game necessary to win a Grand Slam.

Then he goes into the final with ideal preparation, and basically gets spanked.

And now he doubts himself.

Now he wonders whether he is good enough.

pure guessing

It's a combination of factors I think. The loss of confidence post-AO is definitely one, but another is that more players have started to figure out his game and exploit his passivity.
a hell of a lot to figure out to take that long time. definitely the first time a player has played similarly like him, too, hence it took everybody four years, and exactly four to do it.
like tennis even is very complex at all

exactly. all of this was foreseen long ago by the more knowledgeable posters.
what


He has made a GS final already and he has 2 other chances in the year to do it
what

because he will NEVER win RG.
what odds will you give me then

close??? :eek:
40% isnt close?

just not capable of beating an in form Federer (who is?).
anyone really.

Murray is not Federer, he cant afford to play bad in these kind of tournaments. Murray can not even be a "has been", he would rather become a "has been that never was".
how could he possibly not afford to play bad in these tournaments? what could the problem possibly be?
how could federer afford to have bad weeks more than murray?
murray has never been what?


If Murray wants to win a slam and get to #1 (read: beat Nadal and Federer consistently in both slam and non-slam events) he needs to be able to close the net and hit a volley.
great analysing
yes. because he was zero percent to win the us open and the aus open finals. and also zero percent to win all the other slams hes played in.
because the better volley you have, the better you are.

That is not what I wrote, what I wrote was that the knowledge Murray got from the AO final, that he cant beat Federer in a big match caused a paradigm shift where all of a sudden he understood (what many understood a long time ago) that his game is not effective to win slams
where did you find out this is what murray has been pondering about since the final?

(what many understood a long time ago)
LOL ARGUMENT? ONE time?


We all knew Murray couldnt beat Federer in a big match, but now he knows it aswell.
WOOOOW, who did? what a shame for you, now youll have to live with the embarresment forever with making such a comment.

Probably because he still can't figure out the way to win a slam.
you try your best and hope you win, its very simple. cant figure out what?

marcRD
03-29-2010, 10:16 PM
how could he possibly not afford to play bad in these tournaments? what could the problem possibly be?
how could federer afford to have bad weeks more than murray?

Federer can afford to have bad weeks because he doesnt need to gain confidence for the slams, he doesnt need to beat good and bad players in master series to know what it takes to win slams. Federer like almost every great player who approaches 30 needs to concentrate on slams and cant get really motivated to win master series.


murray has never been what?

A has been, must have been something big to be called a has been. If Murray becomes a has been, he will be a has been who never was. Never was great that is, never was a legend, never won a slam. Still better than I will ever be so to speak...




where did you find out this is what murray has been pondering about since the final?

What do you think happened after the final? No one knows what gones on in the head of players, but there are patterns that repeat themselves like when Hewitt and Roddick got beatdowns from Federer in some grand slams in it made their whole career plan make a 180 degrees spin, same goes with Agassi 95 losing to Sampras in US OPEN.




WOOOOW, who did? what a shame for you, now youll have to live with the embarresment forever with making such a comment.


If Murray beats Federer, this will surely be bumped. I am willing to take the risk, the odds are so low for Murray beating Federer in a grand slam, maybe when Federer is post 30 that will happen and someone will bump and make fun of me. I really dont care, I wont feel embarresed or lose sleep over it, that is for sure.

Nole fan
03-29-2010, 10:18 PM
pure guessing


That's all we do here. :lol:

marcRD
03-29-2010, 10:24 PM
Most things you discuss in life are not things which can be determined by absolute facts or evidence, it is speculation and theories that are mostly made up from signs and subjective analysing events. Ofcourse we can discuss with Gustavo about 2+2=4 or if Federer really won 16 slams or if Murray is a slam winner or not, then we would not need to be "guessing" about what is going on with Murray but it would be a shortlived discussion, that is for sure.

Vida
03-29-2010, 10:33 PM
murray summed it up nicely whats going on with him: "I can cry like him, but I cant play like him".

duong
03-29-2010, 11:13 PM
I can see that nobody is interested in what I write :lol: :haha:

But OK, as I'm very stubborn and solitary mind :devil: , I will write what I want yet ;)

The previous article (Guardian) says that "Murray is confused", and there's a quote of Murray saying "I had the tactics worked out, but on court I forgot it" or something like that.

Mouratoglou (French coach) said that Murray's current problem is that he's confused with his tactics because he has too many options in his game.

I think these are interesting (far more than the usual "he can't beat Fed in a slam" bullshits :rolleyes: ).

And it quite fits what I felt before.

It seems that he's trying to change his game currently to attack more, he actually tried it in Dubai, but in Indian Wells and Miami, he rather came back to his "pushing" game because he thought it was better to win.

And he's confused about all that :shrug:

I also think (because I'm stubborn :devil: ) that also because of that and because he's had disappointing results, he has become tired/lazy about his pushing game. Like when he says "I don't feel happy on court".

I think all these are the main points, far more than any "spell" given by Federer in AO final :lol:

Now I still say that clay season might be difficult because of that. If he already feels tired/fed-up/lazy about grinding and pushing, what will it be on clay which is also the surface least adapted to his game ?

On the opposite, I think it's good in the long run that he tries to change his game like that. Sooner or later it will help him, as he has the talent to succeed in that.

One could also say that about Djokovic, who tries to change his game :shrug: But it's really problematic that he's lost his serve :sad: And I don't think he needed as much as Murray had. Murray had a very large potential unused. Djokovic had already a quite complete game imo, and not so much to develop.

That's a stubborn writer's words :devil:

Nole fan
03-29-2010, 11:55 PM
murray summed it up nicely whats going on with him: "I can cry like him, but I cant play like him".

At least not yet but his time will come. :p

Black Adam
03-30-2010, 01:56 AM
As long as Murray is British he'll never win anything because there's always ever so much pressure from the media. And he's got no balls and is up his own ass in regards to the Davis Cup attitude and a sense of importance.

Federerhingis
03-30-2010, 03:20 AM
He has made a GS final already and he has 2 other chances in the year to do it, therefore what he does there is more important than an early loss in a TMS event.

Indian Wells and Miami mean shit in the overall scheme of things. But yes he is washed up and has no chance of turning it around. Believe it or not, players do have the odd dips in form, even the good ones :)

He's also just going through the sophomore slump of sorts after having his first outstanding season pre winning slams. So it's Normal as mentioned above.

gusavo
03-30-2010, 06:50 AM
Federer can afford to have bad weeks because he doesnt need to gain confidence for the slams, he doesnt need to beat good and bad players in master series to know what it takes to win slams. Federer like almost every great player who approaches 30 needs to concentrate on slams and cant get really motivated to win master series.
every player knows how to win a slam. you try your best and hope you win, theres nothing magical.

A has been, must have been something big to be called a has been. If Murray becomes a has been, he will be a has been who never was. Never was great that is, never was a legend, never won a slam. Still better than I will ever be so to speak...
who decided that murray has not been a great player.

What do you think happened after the final? No one knows what gones on in the head of players, but there are patterns that repeat themselves like when Hewitt and Roddick got beatdowns from Federer in some grand slams in it made their whole career plan make a 180 degrees spin, same goes with Agassi 95 losing to Sampras in US OPEN.
you wrote that he found out that he cant beat federer in a big match, that his game isnt effective for grand slam tournaments. any reason why he would possibly think like that.

If Murray beats Federer, this will surely be bumped. I am willing to take the risk, the odds are so low for Murray beating Federer in a grand slam, maybe when Federer is post 30 that will happen and someone will bump and make fun of me. I really dont care, I wont feel embarresed or lose sleep over it, that is for sure.
lol so low. you said it wasnt possible. so how low do you think the odds are?

Arkulari
03-30-2010, 06:52 AM
http://cloudzilla.net/marathon/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/stalker.jpg

marcRD
03-30-2010, 01:58 PM
every player knows how to win a slam. you try your best and hope you win, theres nothing magical.



Yeah.... :rolleyes:

stebs
03-30-2010, 02:08 PM
If Murray beats Federer, this will surely be bumped. I am willing to take the risk, the odds are so low for Murray beating Federer in a grand slam, maybe when Federer is post 30 that will happen and someone will bump and make fun of me. I really dont care, I wont feel embarresed or lose sleep over it, that is for sure.

Why do you think that? Despite the two GS finals Murray has a very good record against Federer. They excel on similar surfaces so it is quite likely they will meet again once or twice. IMO, that Federer spanked Murray in both GS finals doesn't mean anything like Murray can't beat Federer in a slam. It only shows that he can't do it if Federer brings his A game. Murray is still a big threat for Federer, if the Swiss was a s premature as you at writing off rivals he would have suffered a great many more losses in big matches than he has.

Or Levy
03-30-2010, 02:22 PM
Murray problem is that an A level attacking game would always beat an A level defensive game, and a defensive game always takes out more of a player, especially during best of 5.

However, an A level defensive game is more useful against a B level attacking game, than another attacking game. When Murray beat Roger, Roger's best attacking game was lacking (making many UFE) or, like in the TMC - his serve was totally none-existent because of his back in terms of accuracy, pace and variety, and Roger needs a good working serve to win.

Mechlan
03-30-2010, 05:07 PM
Murray problem is that an A level attacking game would always beat an A level defensive game, and a defensive game always takes out more of a player, especially during best of 5.

However, an A level defensive game is more useful against a B level attacking game, than another attacking game. When Murray beat Roger, Roger's best attacking game was lacking (making many UFE) or, like in the TMC - his serve was totally none-existent because of his back in terms of accuracy, pace and variety, and Roger needs a good working serve to win.

Roger has served poorly in multiple previous GS finals of late. In Australia, his serve and ground game were both clicking and Murray had no chance. But Murray is luckier than Roddick or Hewitt that Federer is declining as opposed to entering his prime. I don't think there's any guarantee that Federer will continue to make GS finals the way he has, or play as well in finals as he did in Australia.

Goldenoldie
03-30-2010, 05:10 PM
I can see that nobody is interested in what I write :lol: :haha:


That's not true. Most people are interested in what you write - you talk a lot of sense.
Just not everyone agrees with you.

Personally I think the KIm factor was more important than anybody will admit, and if and when he finds a replacement he'll be ok.

At the moment he's pisssed off with the world in general and himself in particular, and his motivation, which was one of his great strengths, is sadly lacking. He should play one or two 250s and hand out some beatings to some low ranked players to prove to himself he still can. If he confines himself to the big tournaments and loses early each time it's a downward spiral.

Another RogFan
03-30-2010, 05:55 PM
. Murray had a very large potential unused. Djokovic had already a quite complete game imo, and not so much to develop.

That's a stubborn writer's words :devil:

Agree: Djokovich haven’t more room for some big changes and improvement while Murray has a lot of potential to transform into real achievement. The problem is that his defensive style can’t go up anymore. And I’m not sure he can become more offensive without spoil his current abilities. He still can beat anyone but as Federer said in a tight match the offensive player is the one who hold the match on his racquet.
At the end of the day his versatility is unique but he is not Federer and never will be. That’s why lowering expectation could only help.

elessar
03-30-2010, 06:21 PM
I'm tired of reading the same crap all the time about British media pressure. The Press may be mental but they care about tennis for about 2 weeks a year if that kind of stress is too much for Murray to win any slam, then WTF is he doing playing pro tennis.

stebs
03-30-2010, 07:09 PM
I'm tired of reading the same crap all the time about British media pressure. The Press may be mental but they care about tennis for about 2 weeks a year if that kind of stress is too much for Murray to win any slam, then WTF is he doing playing pro tennis.

:yeah: I don't think Murray is actually bothered by the press in a serious way. It pisses him off but I don't perceive it to have any effect on his game or on his achievements so far. I don't buy the posters who call Murray mentally weak, he is a good fighter, plays big points well.

Also, his last 6 GS tournaments have seen two finals, a semi final, a quarter final and two fourth rounds. Perception of strong and weak GS performances have been massively distorted by the relentless succeses of Federer and Nadal. Those numbers are pretty good, obviously disappointing for Murray to have been bested when he actually looked like he might come through with the win, but no reason to panic or state that Murray sucks in GS.

To put those above numbers (2F, 1SF, 1QF, 2R16) in perspective. Here's a run of 6 GS tournaments Sampras played at a similar age (in fact I think almost identical age). From USO '91 to RG '93, Sampras achieved, 1F, 2SF, 3QF). Those numbers are pretty close to Murrays, assuming there were no W/O's that's 27 wins for Murray with 6 defeats and 28 wins with 6 defeats for Sampras. Extremely similar.

It is my opinion that the degree to which the consistency of Federer, Nadal, and to a lesser extent Djokovic in his original surge to the fore, has effected perception of top players is very large. People who started following the game in the last 5 years or so are now shocked and horrified with any early defeats and slumps in form. They happen and they should be expected. Relatively speaking, the consistent successes of top players are exceptions to the rule, not the rule itself.

DrJules
03-30-2010, 08:11 PM
PSYCHOLOGIST READY TO HELP MURRAY

By Eleanor Crooks, Press Association Sport

The psychologist who helped Andy Murray battle back from a serious wrist injury has revealed he will contact the Australian Open finalist this week following his admission he is struggling mentally.

Murray was beaten by Mardy Fish, who is ranked outside the world's top 100, in the second round of the Miami Masters on Saturday.

The 22-year-old went into the tournament as defending champion but produced an error-strewn performance to crash out in straight sets.

Murray has won only four matches since losing to Roger Federer in the Australian Open final in January.

Roberto Forzoni, who also works with the Lawn Tennis Association, said: "I'm there for him.

"We've got a good relationship and he can pick up the phone at any time. I'm going to be trying to contact him in the next day or so to see if there's anything I can do."

Murray first worked with Forzoni in 2007 after struggling to rediscover his confidence following a wrist injury that ruled him out of both the French Open and Wimbledon.

This time the cause of the Scotsman's troubles is less obvious, with his performance during the fortnight in Melbourne arguably the best of his career so far.

Following his loss to Fish, Murray said: "I just wasn't very good and I'm going to need to get a lot better.

"I haven't been tough enough on the court and that's what's most disappointing. Mentally, the last few weeks I've been really poor and unacceptable.

"It's just I need to get my mind right; I need to get focused again. It's purely down to me, what goes on inside my head.

"I've been very happy off the court but not on it and that's where I need to be happy just now because this is my career.

"I need to start to enjoy my tennis again like at the start of the year. I need to be that person again."

Forzoni feels Murray needs to get back to basics and does not think it is surprising the Australian Open high has been followed by a low.

He said: "Sometimes success leads to a natural complacency. You're on a high and doing well and then you have to go out and play lower-ranked guys. The big danger when you're successful is you take your eye off the ball.

"He knows what he needs to work on. If you're not on top of your game, it's a matter of working hard in training, putting those things into practice and getting back to basics.

"What happens occasionally is that players work on the mental side of their game and become successful and they think that's it, but it's like fitness, you need to work on it all the time."

Although Murray's comments may worry some of his supporters, Forzoni regards it as positive that the 22-year-old has identified the problem and is confident he will soon bounce back.

He added: "Over a period of time there are bound to be hiccoughs but he's a good kid, a hard worker and I'm sure he'll work his way through it.

"The general trend has been upwards and he's progressing the way he wants to go."



http://www.sportinglife.com/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=tennis/10/03/29/TENNIS_Murray.html

Sunset of Age
03-30-2010, 08:30 PM
It is my opinion that the degree to which the consistency of Federer, Nadal, and to a lesser extent Djokovic in his original surge to the fore, has effected perception of top players is very large. People who started following the game in the last 5 years or so are now shocked and horrified with any early defeats and slumps in form. They happen and they should be expected. Relatively speaking, the consistent successes of top players are exceptions to the rule, not the rule itself.

It couldn't be expressed better than this way.
I've noticed that in the past couple of years, people sort-of started to expect every new young 'top' player to achieve likewise results as Fed and Nadal have in about no time at all. In reality, it might well take another 10, 20 years to see a dominance like theirs reoccuring, if it happens at all.

marcRD
03-30-2010, 10:50 PM
Why do you think that? Despite the two GS finals Murray has a very good record against Federer. They excel on similar surfaces so it is quite likely they will meet again once or twice. IMO, that Federer spanked Murray in both GS finals doesn't mean anything like Murray can't beat Federer in a slam. It only shows that he can't do it if Federer brings his A game. Murray is still a big threat for Federer, if the Swiss was a s premature as you at writing off rivals he would have suffered a great many more losses in big matches than he has.

The pushing game is effective against Federer in nonslam events but in grand slams he is not going to grant you those easy errors and is going to be completely concentrated all the time. He just is much sharper so it is foolish to let him dictate the game, you better blow him out of the court like Del Potro or have Nadal's leftie spin if you are going to beat him in slams.

Action Jackson
03-31-2010, 12:16 AM
It is my opinion that the degree to which the consistency of Federer, Nadal, and to a lesser extent Djokovic in his original surge to the fore, has effected perception of top players is very large. People who started following the game in the last 5 years or so are now shocked and horrified with any early defeats and slumps in form. They happen and they should be expected. Relatively speaking, the consistent successes of top players are exceptions to the rule, not the rule itself.

Pretty much should be the end of this debate with that paragraph.

rocketassist
03-31-2010, 12:30 AM
The pushing game is effective against Federer in nonslam events but in grand slams he is not going to grant you those easy errors and is going to be completely concentrated all the time. He just is much sharper so it is foolish to let him dictate the game, you better blow him out of the court like Del Potro or have Nadal's leftie spin if you are going to beat him in slams.

Del Potro didn't 'blow him out of the court', Federer handed him that match.

marcRD
03-31-2010, 12:43 AM
Del Potro didn't 'blow him out of the court', Federer handed him that match.

Maybe I chose the wrong word, while Federer indeed had the match in his hands in the deciding moments Del Potro played big and was finding winners from all over the court.

To blow someone out of the court is more like what Federer did to Murray in USOPEN 2008, I cant belive Murray tried to stand 4 meters behind the baseline on courts as fast as those in New York.

HKz
03-31-2010, 12:51 AM
true but the fact is that murray won't do shit in the clay season which means his "season" is now half a season. Add on to the fact that he won't win Wimbledon (pressure etc.) and there's only a quarter of his season left :shrug:

Hmm..

SF @ Monte Carlo (nearly come back in the second set to have a shot at taking the set against Nadal)
QF @ Madrid
QF @ Roland Garros

Wouldn't call that a fail clay season for a player who isn't naturally a clay courter. Unless you only consider wins a "success" then it isn't worth trying to debate with you.

Mungo
03-31-2010, 02:54 AM
Hmm..

SF @ Monte Carlo (nearly come back in the second set to have a shot at taking the set against Nadal)
QF @ Madrid
QF @ Roland Garros

Wouldn't call that a fail clay season for a player who isn't naturally a clay courter. Unless you only consider wins a "success" then it isn't worth trying to debate with you.

Nadal is naturally a clay courter and he won Wimbledon, Aussie Open, Olympics + a bunch of Masters Series on hardcourts.
Quarter finals are bad results for top players + you missed Murray's 1st round exit in Rome. Murray needs to step it up

duong
03-31-2010, 02:02 PM
It is my opinion that the degree to which the consistency of Federer, Nadal, and to a lesser extent Djokovic in his original surge to the fore, has effected perception of top players is very large. People who started following the game in the last 5 years or so are now shocked and horrified with any early defeats and slumps in form. They happen and they should be expected. Relatively speaking, the consistent successes of top players are exceptions to the rule, not the rule itself.

Does it prevent any analyses ?

Winning or losing I'm able to analyze the player's games and problems :shrug:

When Djokovic won in Dubai, I could see that he had big problems :shrug:

I saw Cilic against Verdasco yesterday : actually he lost but he's improving.

I think we can go further than win and lose :shrug:

If on this forum are only allowed crap comments like "... is a mug" "... choked" and "... should retire", then Action_JAckson should tell that to us ;)

I think it's his opinion ;)

Puschkin
03-31-2010, 02:07 PM
Relatively speaking, the consistent successes of top players are exceptions to the rule, not the rule itself.
:yeah: Nothing to add.

In addition, I sincerely doubt this fuss about career-damaging defeats. I feel that players will fret much less than some of their fans, they have to go out and continue practising. That's the positive thing about tennis, the next tourney is right ahead, there a 4 GS per year, in contrast to some Olympic sports where one really has to wait another four years to get a second chance. And I am not saying this to console Murray. :p

Action Jackson
03-31-2010, 02:13 PM
:yeah: Nothing to add.

In addition, I sincerely doubt this fuss about career-damaging defeats. I feel that players will fret much less than some of their fans, they have to go out and continue practising. That's the positive thing about tennis, the next tourney is right ahead, there a 4 GS per year, in contrast to some Olympic sports where one really has to wait another four years to get a second chance. And I am not saying this to console Murray. :p

They are pros, they have to learn how to handle defeats. It's not that hard, the best ones are able to get over their losses and do it day in and day out. It's easy enough to overrract.

stebs
03-31-2010, 02:17 PM
Does it prevent any analyses ?

Winning or losing I'm able to analyze the player's games and problems :shrug:

When Djokovic won in Dubai, I could see that he had big problems :shrug:

I saw Cilic against Verdasco yesterday : actually he lost but he's improving.

I think we can go further than win and lose :shrug:

If on this forum are only allowed crap comments like "... is a mug" "... choked" and "... should retire", then Action_JAckson should tell that to us ;)

I think it's his opinion ;)

Yeah and my post wasn't directed at you. I agree that dips in form can have reasons attributed to them and that is why I posted my own opinion on this discussion which you can see if you read through the thread.

My post was more against the people actually saying Murray's done, Djokovic's done, Player x is done, blah, blah, blah... I am under the impression that this is not close to your views (although actually I think right now Djokovic's problems might be a little more serious than a usual dip in form).

Actually I am surprised you took such an offence to my post if you read the whole thing. I was critiquing the contemptous way Murray is considered in GS play as if his results were shit when actually this isn't the case. It clearly links in with the process which I described in which anomolies in the game (in terms of consistency) have warped peoples view of what should be expected.

Don't worry about it, I enjoy the analyses you provide and they have a greater basis in facts about the game and actually watching matches than the average comments on here (mug, choker, blah, blah, blah). ;)

gusavo
03-31-2010, 02:25 PM
Yeah.... :rolleyes:
whats the problem? how else would it wokr?

It only shows that he can't do it if Federer brings his A game.
it doesent show anything

you better blow him out of the court like Del Potro or have Nadal's leftie spin if you are going to beat him in slams.
yes, you have better chance as 0-5 against your opponent than 7-4

Nadal is naturally a clay courter and he won Wimbledon, Aussie Open, Olympics + a bunch of Masters Series on hardcourts.
Quarter finals are bad results for top players + you missed Murray's 1st round exit in Rome. Murray needs to step it up
uh, of course, because nadals worst surface is very good and murrays worst surface is decent. you found out that players are different things, and if someone is doing a lot worse on a specific surface than the top players of the world they need to step it up, well done.
thats not his expected results, either way.

nestingus
03-31-2010, 03:04 PM
He needs to be able to attack the short ball and (gasp!) close the net and (double gasp!) hit a winning volley.

People say the game is reverting to nothing more than baseline slugging/pushing, but I see the future of the game in players that are able to close the net when given the opportunity. I can't tell you how many times I've watched a match (especially a Murray match), a short ball is given, and the player merely strolls up to it and hits it cross court before retreating to the baseline :o

If Murray wants to win a slam and get to #1 (read: beat Nadal and Federer consistently in both slam and non-slam events) he needs to be able to close the net and hit a volley.

I couldn't agree more. This is Murray's key downfall when playing in the bigger matches. Often he is in the position to win the point and instead he hits a passive forehand. Sometimes he even loses the point. All the other top players close out the point at this opportunity - that includes Delpo, Nole, Fed and Nadal.

The real irony is that he is fanstastic at the net and always has been, but he approaches it so rarely these days his confidence seems to have waned. He doesn't have enough faith in his forehand unfortunately and this is blindingly obvious when he picks up the short ball.

Just a crisis of confidence in my opinion. I'm not sure he is gonna dig himself out of it by the way he plays very easily. The clay season might make rather painful viewing.

Lets hope he surprises us though. He is a wonderful player and he will recover in time. Remember when he lost to Ancic and Haas at Indian Wells and Miami and he bounced back in style that year.

16681
03-31-2010, 07:35 PM
Even before this latest dip in his play Andy has always had the tendency to "go away" in Matches :sad: One second he is on court in both mind and body then in the next second he is on the court in body only :rolleyes: I hope he finally completely gets his game together.

Andy_Murray_Fan
03-31-2010, 09:09 PM
It's so horrible to see Murray in this state :( He is clearly suffering from something, be it the Aussie loss or his split with Kim (a combination of both?) and he has lost his drive to play. The question is how does he get his drive back? To be honest the only way i can see it happening is if he starts winning again. He needs to win a big match or tournament to get him going again and with it being clay season now ...it might be harder than we hope.

Get yourself a Wild Card into MonteCarlo Andy! You can do it mate!

duong
04-01-2010, 01:41 PM
Yeah and my post wasn't directed at you. I agree that dips in form can have reasons attributed to them and that is why I posted my own opinion on this discussion which you can see if you read through the thread.

My post was more against the people actually saying Murray's done, Djokovic's done, Player x is done, blah, blah, blah... I am under the impression that this is not close to your views (although actually I think right now Djokovic's problems might be a little more serious than a usual dip in form).

Actually I am surprised you took such an offence to my post if you read the whole thing. I was critiquing the contemptous way Murray is considered in GS play as if his results were shit when actually this isn't the case. It clearly links in with the process which I described in which anomolies in the game (in terms of consistency) have warped peoples view of what should be expected.

Don't worry about it, I enjoy the analyses you provide and they have a greater basis in facts about the game and actually watching matches than the average comments on here (mug, choker, blah, blah, blah). ;)

Actually my post was not directed at you but rather at Action_Jackson ;)

It's just that your post expressed clearly what he meant :lol:

I mean I'm not gonna quote a post saying "kneejerk reaction" or "nothing more to say" or something like that :haha:

His opinion is fair and I fought against it, the fact is just that to express fully what I meant, I had to quote your post.

Actually it often happens when I write : I quote ideas and not posters. I've often seen that some people don't understand it.

Sorry for that misunderstanding :shrug: but anyway what's more important imo is the idea that we express, not who says it ;)

I also fully agree with you about the general opinion about "Murray and slams" or "Murray can't beat Fed in slams" blablabla : Murray has made 2 slam finals, beaten Nadal twice and very convincingly in slams, he's a top-level player, it's just a matter of time and a little bit more luck for him. People who say that he's not better than Henman :rolleyes:

As for Murray and Djokovic, well Djokovic has more concerns but he maybe has more chance to come back on clay than Murray.

Action Jackson
04-01-2010, 04:38 PM
Actually my post was not directed at you but rather at Action_Jackson ;)

It's just that your post expressed clearly what he meant :lol:

I mean I'm not gonna quote a post saying "kneejerk reaction" or "nothing more to say" or something like that :haha:


Knee jerk reaction is fairly simple and clear, an overreaction to a few poor results. When Murray has a long term slump then it makes sense, the fact that players have peaks and troughs in form is not taken into account, if it was in this case, then fair enough.

duong
04-01-2010, 04:57 PM
Knee jerk reaction is fairly simple and clear, an overreaction to a few poor results. When Murray has a long term slump then it makes sense, the fact that players have peaks and troughs in form is not taken into account, if it was in this case, then fair enough.

yes other people had explained me what you meant :shrug:

Then I understood your point which was fair, yes, but well, I don't think it prevents any analyses.

Murray himself says things like "I'm not happy on court" and so on ...

I've not seen Murray saying things like that for long : I just think there's more going under than the "tennis magical words" of a "confidence slump". Like French coach Mouratoglou who says that he has too many tactical options and he's "confused".

I've seen many clues saying that there's more going on than a "confidence slump".

Actually I don't say it's all bad as it may be promising in the long run.

Action Jackson
04-01-2010, 05:01 PM
Still overreacting. What he didn't have tactical options before 2010, he had them in juniors.

Might as well started one for Söderling after he lost in the 1st round of Melbourne for example.

duong
04-01-2010, 05:07 PM
Still overreacting. What he didn't have tactical options before 2010, he had them in juniors.

the difference is that it seems that he wants to change, as he did in Dubai. But not in Indian Wells and Miami. Anyway, he said he's "confused". I believe more in a game concern for him than in Kim Sears' or DevilFed's approach :lol:

Might as well started one for Söderling after he lost in the 1st round of Melbourne for example.

:smash:

andy neyer
04-01-2010, 08:03 PM
Hey, this is a really nice and telling article on Murray's development and mentality from two and a half years ago. It's a bit of a long read but quite interesting and worth reading, imo.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/jun/09/tennis.features

stebs
04-01-2010, 09:06 PM
Knee jerk reaction is fairly simple and clear, an overreaction to a few poor results. When Murray has a long term slump then it makes sense, the fact that players have peaks and troughs in form is not taken into account, if it was in this case, then fair enough.

Why do you have a problem with analysis of a short term slump? The fact that it is a common occurence for players doesn't mean that it isn't caused by something or linked to something in Murray's game/mentality. Peaks and troughs in form are normal, this one is actually abnormal for Murray though, he hasn't had such a dip for a while and it is relevant to discuss on a tennis board. Much more so than just clicking on every match result thread and posting "mug/pusher/insert banal comment here". Wouldn't you agree?

Murraylicious
04-01-2010, 09:23 PM
Murray had a very large potential unused. Djokovic had already a quite complete game imo, and not so much to develop.

True!

andy neyer
04-15-2010, 03:48 AM
Duong is right, something seems to be off in murray's game. Hopefully he will be able to get his motivation back again.

Action Jackson
04-15-2010, 03:55 AM
Why do you have a problem with analysis of a short term slump? The fact that it is a common occurence for players doesn't mean that it isn't caused by something or linked to something in Murray's game/mentality. Peaks and troughs in form are normal, this one is actually abnormal for Murray though, he hasn't had such a dip for a while and it is relevant to discuss on a tennis board. Much more so than just clicking on every match result thread and posting "mug/pusher/insert banal comment here". Wouldn't you agree?

I have already answered this as to why and you are smart enough for me not to need repeat things. As for abnormal, well Federer has had one, Djokovic has been going through one of these and Nadal has as well, all of these have been long term though and not started after two average events, not counting the Monte Carlo effort.

As for the last part it's annoying, just in a different way.