WWW Wimbledon: Tim Henman throws his weight behind Murray. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

WWW Wimbledon: Tim Henman throws his weight behind Murray.

raahaat7
05-25-2010, 06:11 PM
Murray surely has a chance.
www.atpchampionstour.com/news92.html

marcRD
05-25-2010, 06:12 PM
Federer, Federer, Federer, Nadal, Roddick.

Counterpounching doesnt win Wimbledons.

M4RC
05-25-2010, 06:18 PM
Too strong...

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00798/murray_798430c.jpg

... too good...

http://narocroc.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/andy-murray1.jpg

... too superpowered.

http://www.as.com/recorte/20090119dasdaiten_2/C280/Ies/Andy_Murray_favorito_Boris_Becker.jpg


Too Muzza, biatches.

noctilux
05-25-2010, 06:54 PM
I think Other has a really good chance this year!

Selby
05-25-2010, 07:10 PM
If Nadal doesn't win RG: Federer has a 90% chance to win Wimbledon, Roddick has a 10% chance.
If Nadal does win RG: Federer has 60% chance to win it, Nadal has a 30% chance, Roddick has a 10% chance.
Roddick is the only player bar Federer who really knows how to play on grass, but obviously Nadal proved in 2008 that if he is super confident then he has a good chance to win anything he wants including Wimbledon.

Sophocles
05-25-2010, 07:12 PM
I'd give Murray about as good a chance as Roddick.

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 07:13 PM
If Nadal doesn't win RG: Federer has a 90% chance to win Wimbledon, Roddick has a 10% chance.
If Nadal does win RG: Federer has 60% chance to win it, Nadal has a 30% chance, Roddick has a 10% chance.
Roddick is the only player bar Federer who really knows how to play on grass, but obviously Nadal proved in 2008 that if he is super confident then he has a good chance to win anything he wants including Wimbledon.

I do not want to diminish Roddick's Wimbledon achievements, but I think his success on grass has much more to do with the effectiveness of his serve than him 'knowing how to play on grass'.

Nadal has at least just as good instincts on grass as Roddick.

DrJules
05-25-2010, 07:18 PM
He has as much chance as Nadal and Roddick and more than Djokovic.

Only Federer is more likely to win.

Selby
05-25-2010, 07:19 PM
I'd give Murray about as good a chance as Roddick.

I wouldn't, not this year, not when Murray still hasn't recovered from losing the AO final.
Anyway, even if he does have the same chance, it's a very slim chance.

gusavo
05-25-2010, 07:20 PM
If Nadal doesn't win RG: Federer has a 90% chance to win Wimbledon, Roddick has a 10% chance.
If Nadal does win RG: Federer has 60% chance to win it, Nadal has a 30% chance, Roddick has a 10% chance.
Roddick is the only player bar Federer who really knows how to play on grass, but obviously Nadal proved in 2008 that if he is super confident then he has a good chance to win anything he wants including Wimbledon.
lolllll

I'd give Murray about as good a chance as Roddick.
much better

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 07:23 PM
I'd give Murray about as good a chance as Roddick.

Strongly disagree. Favorite is Federer, with the co-challengers being Roddick and (hopefully) Nadal. Murray does not look nearly as comfortable moving on grass as he does on hardcourt (see Baghdatis 2006, Nadal 2008, Wawrinka and Roddick 2009)

Apophis
05-25-2010, 07:25 PM
I think he will win if someone else takes out Federer. Otherwise he will lose to Federer in semis or final depending on the draw. Roddick will lose relatively early.

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 07:28 PM
I think he will win if someone else takes out Federer. Otherwise he will lose to Federer in semis or final depending on the draw. Roddick will lose relatively early.

If Nadal or Roddick meets Murray at Wimbledon I would not fancy his chances.

federernadalfan
05-25-2010, 07:30 PM
Strongly disagree. Favorite is Federer, with the co-challengers being Roddick and (hopefully) Nadal. Murray does not look nearly as comfortable moving on grass as he does on hardcourt (see Baghdatis 2006, Nadal 2008, Wawrinka and Roddick 2009)

this. murray is not a good as a mover on grass than when he plays on hc

Noleta
05-25-2010, 07:33 PM
If the Muzz loses early in RG,then he will have a big chance to win it,after Roger/Rafa.

r2473
05-25-2010, 07:37 PM
Tim Henman throws his weight behind Murray.

Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 07:39 PM
Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.

this

Roamed
05-25-2010, 07:50 PM
Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.

Yup.

British press make me :o

green25814
05-25-2010, 08:19 PM
He has a better chance than Henman had, thats for sure.

Roddick played incredibly well on grass last year, but I doubt he'll be able to repeat that this time. I have Murray as a slight favourite ahead of Roddick for Wimbledon.

Nadal is below both of them.

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 08:27 PM
He has a better chance than Henman had, thats for sure.

Roddick played incredibly well on grass last year, but I doubt he'll be able to repeat that this time. I have Murray as a slight favourite ahead of Roddick for Wimbledon.

Nadal is below both of them.

Henman was terrific on grass. His resume at Wimbledon far exceeds anything Murray has achieved.

Murray has as much chance of defeating Federer on grass as Henman did to Sampras.

ossie
05-25-2010, 08:28 PM
sorry to break it for the murray fans but its going to be another fedal

tyruk14
05-25-2010, 08:29 PM
He has a better chance than Henman had, thats for sure.

Roddick played incredibly well on grass last year, but I doubt he'll be able to repeat that this time. I have Murray as a slight favourite ahead of Roddick for Wimbledon.

Nadal is below both of them.

Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.

federernadalfan
05-25-2010, 08:31 PM
Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.

this. good post

green25814
05-25-2010, 08:36 PM
Henman was terrific on grass. His resume at Wimbledon far exceeds anything Murray has achieved.

Murray has as much chance of defeating Federer on grass as Henman did to Sampras.

Henman was worse than Murray when it came to failing due to the British hype.

Murray isn't as well-loved, so there's less pressure on him.

General Suburbia
05-25-2010, 08:38 PM
Surprised at how many people think Roddick is the biggest contender for Wimbledon following Nadal/Federer. Murray will find his confidence, and if he were to face Roddick there, I think he'll be the one to edge it out.

Their match last year was incredibly close, and Murray next time will find a better gameplan against Roddick.

SetSampras
05-25-2010, 08:43 PM
Murray will probably never win a slam his entire career.. Hes a garbage pusher

As long as Nadal and Federer are around.. Murray isn't winning anything anyways.. He doesn't have the game, the weapons, the mentality, Hes not a champion

green25814
05-25-2010, 08:47 PM
Murray is less of a pusher than Roddick tbf.

ossie
05-25-2010, 08:57 PM
Murray will probably never win a slam his entire career.. Hes a garbage pusher

As long as Nadal and Federer are around.. Murray isn't winning anything anyways.. He doesn't have the game, the weapons, the mentality, Hes not a championlesser players than murray have won slams

Sophocles
05-25-2010, 09:03 PM
Strongly disagree. Favorite is Federer, with the co-challengers being Roddick and (hopefully) Nadal. Murray does not look nearly as comfortable moving on grass as he does on hardcourt (see Baghdatis 2006, Nadal 2008, Wawrinka and Roddick 2009)

He's better on hard courts, but he's a better player than Roddick overall, & I can't help feeling Roddick had his big chance last year. We'll see.

Chiakifug
05-25-2010, 09:04 PM
Hes saying Murray's game has improved since last year? Yeah right.

Sophocles
05-25-2010, 09:06 PM
Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.

Murray stands a chance against Roddick. He thrashed him at Wimbledon a few years ago, before he was even a top player.

heya
05-25-2010, 09:47 PM
Murray had no fear.
Roddick was the most miserable,
lame participant (not a player),
which caused him to waste a dozen break points
in the 2006 match.

FEDERERBEAUTY
05-25-2010, 10:05 PM
Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.

Yup.

Wimbledon is still weeks away and the tedious, nauseating hype for the constipated rodent lookalike has started already:zzz:
Next up - the stomach churning magazine covers of rodent topless and the relentless interviews, 'Wimbledon is mine for the taking this year' blah blah blah.

DwyaneWade
05-25-2010, 10:23 PM
Murray stands a chance against Roddick. He thrashed him at Wimbledon a few years ago, before he was even a top player.

Of course he stands a chance. He matches up extremely well against Roddick on any surface. Roddick would be favored however, IMO.

That win in 2006 was impressive, but it must be noted that Roddick is a much more complete player than he was that year pre-Connors. Not a fan of Roddick, but one has to respect the work he has put in to improve his game.

Roamed
05-25-2010, 10:29 PM
It's advisable to stay away from the TV, papers, internet and most of all Sue Barker if you aren't a Murray fan coming up to Wimbledon.

Sunset of Age
05-25-2010, 10:35 PM
It's advisable to stay away from the TV, papers, internet and most of all Sue Barker if you aren't a Murray fan coming up to Wimbledon.

Yeah... when will media ever understand that overhyping a player (close to death when it comes to the entities "Murray" and "Wimbledon" :help:) never ever helps that player???

That said, I surely give Murray a fair chance, behind Fedal that is. Last year he merely lost because he had the bad luck of bumping into an on-fire Roddick - his final match against Fed might well have been one of his best ever.
In any case his chances are a lot better than, say, Djokovic's.

_Shonen_
05-25-2010, 11:36 PM
He has a reasonable chance, but it's far more likely that he won't win than he will.
I would have said his chances were better going into the tournament last year than this.

Persimmon
05-26-2010, 12:13 AM
Murray will probably never win a slam his entire career.. Hes a garbage pusher

As long as Nadal and Federer are around.. Murray isn't winning anything anyways.. He doesn't have the game, the weapons, the mentality, Hes not a champion

Indeed. Look at Murray's performances in slam finals vs Fed:o:o

Sunset of Age
05-26-2010, 12:16 AM
Indeed. Look at Murray's performances in slam finals vs Fed:o:o

Fed isn't going to stay around forever, and Murray has at least five more good years to give it a try.

ApproachShot
05-26-2010, 12:21 AM
Fed isn't going to stay around forever, and Murray has at least five more good years to give it a try.

Agreed. I think that Murray will have a good chance of winning the tournament but it will be unlikely that he does so this year.

Sunset of Age
05-26-2010, 12:27 AM
Agreed. I think that Murray will have a good chance of winning the tournament but it will be unlikely that he does so this year.

Yep, I agree with you on this. Murray was obviously rather hurt from his failure at the AO this year (well, 'failure'... he bumped into Fed playing near to his best tennis, bad luck that is! :o), a blow that hit him even harder because of all the hype surrounding him at that time. He obviously needed/needs some time to recover from that and as such I don't see him win Wimbledon this year either. But stranger things have happened...

In all, I see this classic MTF overreaction happen over and over again, in two directions: tennis player X has a good run = 20 GS titles in the bag, GOAT, etc.; tennis player Y suffers a bad patch in his career = written off, will never win anything again, done, should retire (even in case the guy is barely in his twenties). :help:

He's got time on his side and will be a source to reckon with for many years to come if he manages to find back his enjoyment in playing tennis back again. I think he will. :)

Clydey
05-26-2010, 12:33 AM
Strongly disagree. Favorite is Federer, with the co-challengers being Roddick and (hopefully) Nadal. Murray does not look nearly as comfortable moving on grass as he does on hardcourt (see Baghdatis 2006, Nadal 2008, Wawrinka and Roddick 2009)

Why would anyone cite the Roddick match as evidence that Murray can't play on grass? Roddick's last two matches at last year's Wimbledon were two of the best matches he has ever played. He won two more points than Murray in the whole match, hit fewer winners, more unforced errors, and fewer aces. That match could scarcely have been tighter. It was decided on two very closely contested tiebreaks.

Sunset of Age
05-26-2010, 12:34 AM
Why would anyone cite the Roddick match as evidence that Murray can't play on grass? Roddick's last two matches at last year's Wimbledon were two of the best matches he has ever played. He won two more points than Murray in the whole match, hit fewer winners, more unforced errors, and fewer aces. That match could scarcely have been tighter. It was decided on two very closely contested tiebreaks.

Exactly.

-Valhalla-
05-26-2010, 01:30 AM
Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.

:lol:

coonster14
05-26-2010, 02:24 AM
if i were a betting person, i would put the favourites in this order for wimbledon:
1. federer (self-explanatory)
2. nadal (has won wimbledon before, so would put him in front of roddick)
3. roddick (along with federer, one of the very few nowadays who knows how to play on the green stuff, came ultra close to the title last year, 3 times runner-up)
4. murray (QF/SF the last 2 years, can he go one further in 2010 to the final or maybe even win it? we will see...)

and then after those 4, i would have to say probably players like djokovic, soderling, hewitt (former wimbledon champ, and has had pretty consistent results there the last 6 years for his seeding).

green25814
05-26-2010, 03:22 AM
Yep, I agree with you on this. Murray was obviously rather hurt from his failure at the AO this year (well, 'failure'... he bumped into Fed playing near to his best tennis, bad luck that is! :o), a blow that hit him even harder because of all the hype surrounding him at that time. He obviously needed/needs some time to recover from that and as such I don't see him win Wimbledon this year either. But stranger things have happened...

In all, I see this classic MTF overreaction happen over and over again, in two directions: tennis player X has a good run = 20 GS titles in the bag, GOAT, etc.; tennis player Y suffers a bad patch in his career = written off, will never win anything again, done, should retire (even in case the guy is barely in his twenties). :help:

He's got time on his side and will be a source to reckon with for many years to come if he manages to find back his enjoyment in playing tennis back again. I think he will. :)

Tbh, I think Murray will be at his most dangerous when people expect the least from him. I don't think his game has changed since last year, the only difference is perhaps less pressure.

~*BGT*~
05-26-2010, 03:29 AM
Strongly disagree. Favorite is Federer, with the co-challengers being Roddick and (hopefully) Nadal. Murray does not look nearly as comfortable moving on grass as he does on hardcourt (see Baghdatis 2006, Nadal 2008, Wawrinka and Roddick 2009)

Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.

Nothing else needs to be said.

raahaat7
05-26-2010, 03:51 AM
Tbh, I think Murray will be at his most dangerous when people expect the least from him.

agreed.

enigma
05-26-2010, 04:22 AM
Too strong...

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00798/murray_798430c.jpg

... too good...

http://narocroc.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/andy-murray1.jpg

... too superpowered.

http://www.as.com/recorte/20090119dasdaiten_2/C280/Ies/Andy_Murray_favorito_Boris_Becker.jpg


Too Muzza, biatches.


:banghead:

Quakes
05-26-2010, 05:51 AM
I'll give Federer 50%, Nadal 30%, Roddick 10%, Murray 5%, and the rest 5%.

River
05-26-2010, 05:54 AM
Too strong...

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00798/murray_798430c.jpg

... too good...

http://narocroc.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/andy-murray1.jpg

... too superpowered.

http://www.as.com/recorte/20090119dasdaiten_2/C280/Ies/Andy_Murray_favorito_Boris_Becker.jpg


Too Muzza, biatches.

1st Image: Lost to Federer

2nd Image: Dunno where that's from... Masters maybe.

3rd Image: If that's the Aussie Open then we yeah.. he got demolished by Fed again...

He can be as physical all he wants. His mental strength is lacking on big games.

marcRD
05-26-2010, 08:37 AM
Murray was almost beaten by Wawrinka last year.....

I think he could have problems against more players than just Federer, Nadal and Roddick. Murray is vulnerable against players in a streak, it could be someone like Cilic, Söderling or even lower ranked players like Kohly and Youzhny.

I think Roddick can be almost unbreakable at times on grass so he must be a more dangerous opponent for Federer/Nadal than Murray. Nadal will have to win RG to gain confidence and will have to be healthy and avoid long matches at Wimbledon so he can get to the SF/F with healthy knees.

I would really love to see Söderling-Nadal in Wimbledon QF.....

FlameOn
05-26-2010, 09:31 AM
It would be kind of nice if he did. But I voted 'Other'.

JediFed
05-26-2010, 09:37 AM
The trouble with Murray is that he is 23 now. Time really isn't on his side anymore. Lendl is the only player older to win his first slam, and still eventually reach number 1.

So the next 6 or 7 slams will be critical for Murray, and will give us a better idea of what to expect from his career.

gusavo
05-26-2010, 10:48 AM
Murray will probably never win a slam his entire career.. Hes a garbage pusher

As long as Nadal and Federer are around.. Murray isn't winning anything anyways.. He doesn't have the game, the weapons, the mentality, Hes not a champion
he has been expected to win one already, so your argument fails immidietly.

yes, hes certainly shown he has no chance against nadal or federer...

Henman was terrific on grass. His resume at Wimbledon far exceeds anything Murray has achieved.
murray is not 34

Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.
this is lunacy. so you have bet everything you own against murray then? you must have, its free money.

this. good post
insane post

He's better on hard courts, but he's a better player than Roddick overall, & I can't help feeling Roddick had his big chance last year. We'll see.
hes much better than roddick everywhere

Yeah... when will media ever understand that overhyping a player (close to death when it comes to the entities "Murray" and "Wimbledon" :help:) never ever helps that player???

like it makes any big difference

Murray was almost beaten by Wawrinka last year.....
nadal was beaten by soderling last year. in four. people are retarded for saying he has any kind of chance this year in RG.

I think he could have problems against more players than just Federer, Nadal and Roddick.
you mean like federer could have problems against more players than the top, like berdych, accasuso, haas? or nadal against soderling, cilic?

it could be someone like Cilic, Söderling or even lower ranked players like Kohly and Youzhny.
you mean like kohl against djoko or youzhny against nadal?

I think Roddick can be almost unbreakable at times on grass so he must be a more dangerous opponent for Federer/Nadal than Murray.
hes not

Sunset of Age
05-26-2010, 10:56 AM
The trouble with Murray is that he is 23 now. Time really isn't on his side anymore. Lendl is the only player older to win his first slam, and still eventually reach number 1.

The fact that one player has already been able to grab his first slam after age 23 is already enough proof that it is possible. ;)
23 is still very young, and the age at which a player manages to grab his first GS title is no indication of what will follow. Chang got his first aged 17 and never managed to get one thereafter, whereas there have been quite a few players who grabbed their first at 21, 22, and continued to rack up some 10+ more.
The big trouble for Murray is that there are at least two contenders there who refuse to 'go away' even if they are about 5 years older. Roddick and Feds. But they won't be hanging around forever...

So the next 6 or 7 slams will be critical for Murray, and will give us a better idea of what to expect from his career.

Yes I agree. BTW, I am not claiming that he surely will grab a GS title - I'm just defending a player against the usual MTF statements that "Player X will NEVER etc." :)

FlameOn
05-26-2010, 11:00 AM
The fact that one player has already been able to grab his first slam after age 23 is already enough proof that it is possible. ;)
23 is still very young, and the age at which a player manages to grab his first GS title is no indication of what will follow. Chang got his first aged 17 and never managed to get one thereafter, whereas there have been quite a few players who grabbed their first at 21, 22, and continued to rack up some 10+ more.
The big trouble for Murray is that there are at least two contenders there who refuse to 'go away' even if they are about 5 years older. Roddick and Feds. But they won't be hanging around forever...



Yes I agree. BTW, I am not claiming that he surely will grab a GS title - I'm just defending a player against the usual MTF statements that "Player X will NEVER etc." :)
Yeah many including me didn't think Delpo would win a slam ever (even last year) but he surprised us all.

icara
05-26-2010, 11:16 AM
There are two problems for Murry

1- Pressure from media
2- He is around for couple of years and not won a slam. From a normal tennis watchers point of view Nadal came to the big stage, we heard his name, he won a slam. Same with Del Potro, we won USO around a year after he was considered to be good. Djokovic was probably one that took the longest, roughly 3 years but Murray hs entered his 5th, and gotten close a few times and he has nothing to show. Plus he is getting older every second.

zcess81
05-26-2010, 11:22 AM
He has as much chance as Nadal and Roddick and more than Djokovic.

Only Federer is more likely to win.

sure he does :spit::spit:

Tutu
05-26-2010, 01:50 PM
Asked about Murray’s chances of going a step further than he managed and reaching the Wimbledon final, Henman was bullish.

“He played great last year getting through to his first semi and I think he was very disappointed to lose to Roddick. All credit to Roddick for the match that he played because it was phenomenal. But I think Murray’s matured again, he’s improved, his game is better, he’s got 12 months more experience and I think he’s got every chance of winning what would potentially be his first Grand Slam title.”


Translation: Murray really ain't got a shot in hell (pretty much the same as me playing at the same time as Pete). But, I pretty much have to say he will win every year because this is Britain and I would be shot if I didn't.
Wrong. The pecking order on grass is as follows: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, then everyone else. Until someone steps up to prove otherwise, no one else stands a chance against these three at Wimbledon, Murray included.

To question that is sheer lunacy.
Preach! Both of you. :worship:

Why would anyone cite the Roddick match as evidence that Murray can't play on grass? Roddick's last two matches at last year's Wimbledon were two of the best matches he has ever played. He won two more points than Murray in the whole match, hit fewer winners, more unforced errors, and fewer aces. That match could scarcely have been tighter. It was decided on two very closely contested tiebreaks.
:lol: I guess not many people replied to you because they put you and your deslusional self onto ignore?



[B}3rd Image: If that's the Aussie Open then we yeah.. he got demolished by Fed again...
[/B]
He can be as physical all he wants. His mental strength is lacking on big games.

Even better, he lost to Fernando. :worship:

Sillyrabbit
05-26-2010, 01:57 PM
nadal was beaten by soderling last year. in four. people are retarded for saying he has any kind of chance this year in RG.


Not necessarily disagreeing with the overall tune of your post, but that part is a silly comparison. Nadal is the best player on clay right now, no matter what happened the previous year, he'll always be a contender at any clay event as long as he can stand on two legs. You can't say the same about Murray and grass, so comparing those two scenarios is moot and makes no sense.

Sophocles
05-26-2010, 02:28 PM
hes much better than roddick everywhere

I agree. I just meant Murray is better on hard courts than on grass.

marcRD
05-26-2010, 04:02 PM
You shouldnt be debating with Gustavo, that guy has some serious problems. I got this pm from him today:

pathetic coward, you are so bad at arguing and tennis, retard

wackykid
05-26-2010, 04:44 PM
Yeah... when will media ever understand that overhyping a player (close to death when it comes to the entities "Murray" and "Wimbledon" :help:) never ever helps that player???

well probably they don't really care?? overhyping a british player is probably going to sell more papers... and they would care about this... :rolleyes:



regards,
wacky

R.Federer
05-26-2010, 05:19 PM
The Fedals are still favorites, and Roddick is definitely a contender. Murray is less of a contender than those 3, but above 99% of the rest.

gusavo
05-27-2010, 02:29 PM
You shouldnt be debating with Gustavo
how would you know, youve never attempted it.

that guy has some serious problems. I got this pm from him today:

pathetic coward, you are so bad at arguing and tennis, retard
obviously. you cant argue against me and answer my posts with pathetic insults, which is apparently fine no matter what you do as long as you dont tell someone to kill themselves. who made the forum rules?

Not necessarily disagreeing with the overall tune of your post, but that part is a silly comparison. Nadal is the best player on clay right now, no matter what happened the previous year, he'll always be a contender at any clay event as long as he can stand on two legs. You can't say the same about Murray and grass, so comparing those two scenarios is moot and makes no sense.
thats the point, nadal could lose to a player ranked 1000 in straights at rg and it would make fairly little difference to the odds at the next rg. the comment he made is pointless and says nothing

Jaz
05-27-2010, 03:49 PM
I have a hard time believing Murray can beat both Federer and Nadal (as he probably will have to do to win this tournament).

TheBoiledEgg
05-27-2010, 04:00 PM
Fred Perry and Bunny Austin have more chance

Clydey
05-27-2010, 04:01 PM
:lol: I guess not many people replied to you because they put you and your deslusional self onto ignore?

You're going to have to elaborate. What part of my post was delusional? I listed a bunch of facts about the Roddick-Murray semi-final from Wimbledon last year.

Murray hit 76 winners and 20 unforced errors.

Roddick hit 64 winners and 24 unforced errors.

Murray hit 25 aces

Roddick hit 21 aces

Murray created 7 break points and converted 2.

Roddick created 5 break points and converted 2.

Murray won 141 points

Roddick won 143 points.

Looking at the above stats, how can you say that it's delusional for me to call it an extremely close match?

marcRD
05-27-2010, 04:13 PM
You're going to have to elaborate. What part of my post was delusional? I listed a bunch of facts about the Roddick-Murray semi-final from Wimbledon last year.

Murray hit 76 winners and 20 unforced errors.

Roddick hit 64 winners and 24 unforced errors.

Murray hit 25 aces

Roddick hit 21 aces

Murray created 7 break points and converted 2.

Roddick created 5 break points and converted 2.

Murray won 141 points

Roddick won 143 points.

Looking at the above stats, how can you say that it's delusional for me to call it an extremely close match?

I agree, it was a close match but Roddick is stronger mentally and is expected to win close matches between them.

ossie
05-27-2010, 05:11 PM
murray wont lose to roddick again

DwyaneWade
05-27-2010, 07:34 PM
I have a hard time believing Murray can beat both Federer and Nadal (as he probably will have to do to win this tournament).

You're going to have to elaborate. What part of my post was delusional? I listed a bunch of facts about the Roddick-Murray semi-final from Wimbledon last year.

Murray hit 76 winners and 20 unforced errors.

Roddick hit 64 winners and 24 unforced errors.

Murray hit 25 aces

Roddick hit 21 aces

Murray created 7 break points and converted 2.

Roddick created 5 break points and converted 2.

Murray won 141 points

Roddick won 143 points.

Looking at the above stats, how can you say that it's delusional for me to call it an extremely close match?

No one said it wasn't close. But Roddick's track record on grass speaks for itself. Perhaps Murray has the head-to-head edge, but I think Roddick is more likely to win Wimbledon (which is not very likely at all, Federer should take it with ease)

SetSampras
05-27-2010, 09:09 PM
he has been expected to win one already, so your argument fails immidietly.




Actually its murray thats the epic fail like he showed us both times he played federer in a slam final.. he was blown off the court both times. Lets face it... Murray is like any other of these hotdog youngins. People overrate these guys BEFORE they have yet to even prove their true worth.. Lets see the guy win a slam first BEFORE we EXPECT big things out of him



So far has been nothing short of an epic fail type player. Another guy who can't bring it when its all on the line. I dont blame the guys like Murray as much as these goofy fans (especially british fans) who want to rate Murray high and expect so much out of him before he has actually done anything of note.


Same with Djokovic.. Hes been an epic fail for over 2 years now. Yet so much is expected out of him.

KostyaTszyu
05-27-2010, 09:13 PM
Not this year Andrew.

BaselineSmash
05-27-2010, 09:40 PM
I'm throwing my weight behind Gasquet. Plus Isner, Gulbis, and Murray.

paseo
05-28-2010, 01:17 AM
Actually its murray thats the epic fail like he showed us both times he played federer in a slam final.. he was blown off the court both times.

Let's be fair here, both times Murray was so good that only Fed with his A-game can take him out. And to his luck, or I should say bad luck, that's exactly who showed up in those finals. Losing to NinjaFed is not epic fail. Cause when Fed brings his A-game, nobody beats him. That's why Fed is (arguably) The GOAT.

Having said that, I don't think Murray will win a slam this year. But, he will win one next year though.

DwyaneWade
05-28-2010, 01:30 AM
Let's be fair here, both times Murray was so good that only Fed with his A-game can take him out. And to his luck, or I should say bad luck, that's exactly who showed up in those finals. Losing to NinjaFed is not epic fail. Cause when Fed brings his A-game, nobody beats him. That's why Fed is (arguably) The GOAT.

Having said that, I don't think Murray will win a slam this year. But, he will win one next year though.

I feel like Murray, Del Potro, and Djokovic HAVE to win more grand slams simply because of the vacuum created as Federer ages and Nadal declines. Somebody has to win each of 4 slams every year and there do not seem to be any other good candidates (unless we go back to the post-Sampras 2001-2002 chaos)

raahaat7
05-28-2010, 09:31 AM
I feel like Murray, Del Potro, and Djokovic HAVE to win more grand slams simply because of the vacuum created as Federer ages and Nadal declines. Somebody has to win each of 4 slams every year and there do not seem to be any other good candidates (unless we go back to the post-Sampras 2001-2002 chaos)

Let's discuss the present not wt wd happen 4 years from now. Remember Fedal still there. A Murray win is significant only wen Fedal are in d draw.

tennishero
05-28-2010, 09:36 AM
with the way murray is playing now, i think he will have his best chance so far.

gusavo
05-29-2010, 01:54 PM
Actually its murray thats the epic fail like he showed us both times he played federer in a slam final.. he was blown off the court both times.
lol, how is that failing?

Lets face it... Murray is like any other of these hotdog youngins. People overrate these guys BEFORE they have yet to even prove their true worth..
we already know how good he is, what prove their true worth?

Lets see the guy win a slam first BEFORE we EXPECT big things out of him
hes already won more than a GS based on how good he is, and he has been unlucky not to get one, thats what I said


So far has been nothing short of an epic fail type player. Another guy who can't bring it when its all on the line.
what is your problem, you want him to make himself play as good as its neccessary on the spot? how would that work? and what if the other player does it as well? this is so stupid, what are you talking about

SetSampras
05-29-2010, 02:23 PM
Let's be fair here, both times Murray was so good that only Fed with his A-game can take him out. And to his luck, or I should say bad luck, that's exactly who showed up in those finals. Losing to NinjaFed is not epic fail. Cause when Fed brings his A-game, nobody beats him. That's why Fed is (arguably) The GOAT.

Having said that, I don't think Murray will win a slam this year. But, he will win one next year though.



ITs murray's game that PERMITS that.. Why did Fed just so happen to bring his A game to Murray in both finals? Simple.. Murray doesn't have the game to counterract Federer. He isn't nearly as aggressive as he needs to be.. Del Potro has the ability to knock Fed off his game because of his aggressivenes and we know what nadal can do. Murray doesnt have enough aggressivenes.. He is too passive as a player and he doesnt have anything in his arsenal that can hurt Federer

As I said.. He doesnt have the weapons, the aggressiveness, the mentality to be a champion.. And he doesn't..... OK. He can manage some rinky dink hardcourt 3 set matches smaller tournaments which the top dogs don't even really care about.. And until he wins something more of note its nothing more than that. He should be lucky to be where he is at in the rankings right now.IMO He needs a totally restructuring of his game.. Maybe a new coach, and a new mentality.. or he is never winning a slam much less as many as some of these clueless Murray fans project him to win

yuri27
05-29-2010, 02:55 PM
My top 5 contenders in order for Wimbledon this year:

1.Federer
2.Nadal/Roddick
4.Murray/Gasquet

DwyaneWade
05-29-2010, 05:39 PM
My top 5 contenders in order for Wimbledon this year:

1.Federer
2.Nadal/Roddick
4.Murray/Gasquet

:worship:

Clydey
05-29-2010, 05:44 PM
My top 5 contenders in order for Wimbledon this year:

1.Federer
2.Nadal/Roddick
4.Murray/Gasquet

Gasquet? What?

Filo V.
05-29-2010, 05:50 PM
Not Murray, that's for sure.

yuri27
05-29-2010, 05:51 PM
Gasquet? What?

Gasquet on grass:1/2 final at Wimbledon (losing to Federer in straight but had to play Roddick until 9p.m. the day before),2 titles,wins over Roddick,Tsonga or Ancic and managed to take one set to Federer.

Murray on grass: 1/2 final at Wimbledon,1 title,wins over Roddick and Blake

That's comparable.

Murray was incredibly lucky to win their match in 2008: he can both thank the Wimbledon crowd which was pathetic that day(even more pathetic than the french crowd which says a lot) and Gasquet's incredible ability to choke.
He was also lucky to win one week ago but that was for another reason(Gasquet's fitness after having won 11 matches in a row)

I'm really hopping to see a re-match beetween those two at Wimbledon with Gasquet kicking his ass UNTIL THE END THIS TIME.
Who can like a guy who shouts "come on" on nearly every opponent's UE or who shows his muscle at the end of a match in front of the player he just beat??
Serious lack of class.

DwyaneWade
05-29-2010, 07:17 PM
Yeah but he is Gasquet, haha, has made ONE grand-slam SF in his career and you call him 4th favorite for Wimbledon. Hahahaha

ossie
05-29-2010, 08:06 PM
murray would probably have to beat rafa and fed, dont see that happening

raahaat7
05-29-2010, 08:12 PM
murray would probably have to beat rafa and fed, dont see that happening

It is all about making things happen.

Clydey
05-29-2010, 09:14 PM
Gasquet on grass:1/2 final at Wimbledon (losing to Federer in straight but had to play Roddick until 9p.m. the day before),2 titles,wins over Roddick,Tsonga or Ancic and managed to take one set to Federer.

Murray on grass: 1/2 final at Wimbledon,1 title,wins over Roddick and Blake

That's comparable.

Murray was incredibly lucky to win their match in 2008: he can both thank the Wimbledon crowd which was pathetic that day(even more pathetic than the french crowd which says a lot) and Gasquet's incredible ability to choke.
He was also lucky to win one week ago but that was for another reason(Gasquet's fitness after having won 11 matches in a row)

I'm really hopping to see a re-match beetween those two at Wimbledon with Gasquet kicking his ass UNTIL THE END THIS TIME.
Who can like a guy who shouts "come on" on nearly every opponent's UE or who shows his muscle at the end of a match in front of the player he just beat??
Serious lack of class.

So based on one semi-final 3 years ago and a couple of Nottingham titles, Gasquet is joint 4th favourite for Wimbledon this year? You are pure comedy, sir.

ossie
05-29-2010, 10:25 PM
Gasquet on grass:1/2 final at Wimbledon (losing to Federer in straight but had to play Roddick until 9p.m. the day before),2 titles,wins over Roddick,Tsonga or Ancic and managed to take one set to Federer.

Murray on grass: 1/2 final at Wimbledon,1 title,wins over Roddick and Blake

That's comparable.

Murray was incredibly lucky to win their match in 2008: he can both thank the Wimbledon crowd which was pathetic that day(even more pathetic than the french crowd which says a lot) and Gasquet's incredible ability to choke.
He was also lucky to win one week ago but that was for another reason(Gasquet's fitness after having won 11 matches in a row)

I'm really hopping to see a re-match beetween those two at Wimbledon with Gasquet kicking his ass UNTIL THE END THIS TIME.
Who can like a guy who shouts "come on" on nearly every opponent's UE or who shows his muscle at the end of a match in front of the player he just beat??
Serious lack of class.
mtf at its best :haha:

yuri27
05-30-2010, 07:57 PM
So based on one semi-final 3 years ago and a couple of Nottingham titles, Gasquet is joint 4th favourite for Wimbledon this year? You are pure comedy, sir.

Yes,he is.
The last two times he played Wimbledon,it needed Federer and Murray to eliminate him.
On Grass,Gasquet has been one of the 5 best players for the last 3 years.
To say otherwise just shows a serious lack of knowledge

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 08:00 PM
Yes,he is.
The last two times he played Wimbledon,it needed Federer and Murray to eliminate him.
On Grass,Gasquet has been one of the 5 best players for the last 3 years.
Wow, delusional much and bias much? Gasquet won't reach QFs. No way he is 4th favourite, are you nuts?

Oh and no, he has been one of the 5 best grass court players for only one year - 2007.

That was 3 years ago, no way he is any sort of favourite this year.

To say otherwise just shows a serious lack of knowledge

Wow, you're comedy. I think you have serious lack of knowledge for thinking so.

MrChopin
05-30-2010, 08:41 PM
At Wimbledon, Nadal-Murray and Roddick-Murray are coin flips, possibly even more as I think Murray's chances against these two have improved over the last twelve months. If Murray has the fortune of not being on Fed's side, I could see him in the final. Beating Fed in a slam is another matter.

yuri27
05-30-2010, 08:46 PM
Wow, delusional much and bias much? Gasquet won't reach QFs. No way he is 4th favourite, are you nuts?

Oh and no, he has been one of the 5 best grass court players for only one year - 2007.

That was 3 years ago, no way he is any sort of favourite this year.



Wow, you're comedy. I think you have serious lack of knowledge for thinking so.

So let's laugh a little bit: who do you rate above Gasquet on grass at the moment bar Federer,Nadal,Roddick and possibly Murray?

Filo V.
05-30-2010, 09:33 PM
I expect Murray to lose early at Wimbledon. Probably 4th round or so.

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 09:40 PM
So let's laugh a little bit: who do you rate above Gasquet on grass at the moment bar Federer,Nadal,Roddick and possibly Murray?
Ferrero could very well be better at his best. Soderling too. Berdych and Youzhny at their best too. Also Tsonga (though he's injured) and Djokovic.

Hoestly though, Gasquet is not one of the 5 favourites for Wimbledon, ffs.

marcRD
05-30-2010, 09:40 PM
So let's laugh a little bit: who do you rate above Gasquet on grass at the moment bar Federer,Nadal,Roddick and possibly Murray?

I would say Söderling is far more dangerous on that surface than Gasquet (mainly because he is mentaly stronger than Gasquet), I bet Nadal and Federer would rather play Gasquet any day. I think Cilic and Tsonga could also be dangerous on grass, Djokovic is also a more dangerous player than Gasquet on grass. Too bad, because I like Gasquet but he is a headcase with a big H.

yuri27
05-30-2010, 10:14 PM
Ferrero could very well be better at his best. Soderling too. Berdych and Youzhny at their best too. Also Tsonga (though he's injured) and Djokovic.

Hoestly though, Gasquet is not one of the 5 favourites for Wimbledon, ffs.



:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:

I would say Söderling is far more dangerous on that surface than Gasquet (mainly because he is mentaly stronger than Gasquet), I bet Nadal and Federer would rather play Gasquet any day. I think Cilic and Tsonga could also be dangerous on grass, Djokovic is also a more dangerous player than Gasquet on grass. Too bad, because I like Gasquet but he is a headcase with a big H.

You've got to be laughing,right??
Gasquet has regularly been as good if not better than Djokovic on Grass.
Do you even picture Djokovic beating Roddick on grass for instance??
That's too bad the grass season is so short as it would be obvious for anyone otherwise.

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 10:19 PM
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:



You've got to be laughing,right??
Gasquet has regularly been as good if not better than Djokovic on Grass.
Do you even picture Djokovic beating Roddick on grass for instance??
That's too bad the grass season is so short as it would be obvious for anyone otherwise.
laugh it up, Yuri. Ferrero has reached the Wimby quarterfinals twice, the 4th round also twice. He's no mug on grass. And he's more mentally strong and reliable than Gasquet.

Also, there are still the other 5 players that I said.

Djokovic is no.3 on the world and os much more of a threat than Gasquet atm so, sorry, but you're wrong.

yuri27
05-30-2010, 10:23 PM
laugh it up, Yuri. Ferrero has reached the Wimby quarterfinals twice, the 4th round also twice. He's no mug on grass. And he's more mentally strong and reliable than Gasquet.

Also, there are still the other 5 players that I said.

Djokovic is no.3 on the world and os much more of a threat than Gasquet atm so, sorry, but you're wrong.

Who did Ferrero exactly beat to reach those 1/4 finals????

Gasquet reached a 1/2 final beating in straight sets very good grass courts players like Mahut and Tsonga and beating Roddick coming down from 2 sets to love.
I wonder if Ferrero has ever beaten players as good as Mahut(on grass,he is very good) and Tsonga on grass,let alone Roddick.
Not to mention Gasquet has beaten twice a guy like Ancic who is no mug on grass to say the least.


Djokovic is no.3 on the world and os much more of a threat than Gasquet atm so, sorry, but you're wrong.

Following your reasoning then Murray is a better clay court player than the likes of Ferrer,Soderling or Verdasco as he is the number 4 player in the world.:rolleyes:

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 10:29 PM
Who did Ferrero exactly beat to reach those 1/4 finals????

Gasquet reached a 1/2 final beating in straight sets very good grass courts players like Mahut and Tsonga and beating Roddick coming down from 2 sets to love.
I wonder if Ferrero has ever beaten players as good as Mahut(on grass,he is very good) and Tsonga on grass,let alone Roddick.
Not to mention Gasquet has beaten twice a guy like Ancic who is no mug on grass to say the least.

Why are you bringing up what Gasquet did 3 years ago? He's done squat since, while Ferrero has been solid on all 3 surfaces, and he reached the QFs last year at Wimby.

Following your reasoning then Murray is a better clay court player than the likes of Ferrer,Soderling or Verdasco as he is the number 4 player in the world.:rolleyes:

Again you don't see the picture, Djokovic is arguably more dangerous than Gasquet on grass at his best just because he's better overall.

yuri27
05-30-2010, 10:32 PM
Again you don't see the picture, Djokovic is arguably more dangerous than Gasquet on grass at his best just because he's better overall.

Gasquet's quicker reflexes and better touch at the net,not to mention his ability to hit powerful backhands on low- slice balls makes him at least as dangerous on grass as Djokovic.
Grass is by far Djokovic's worst surface while it's by far Gasquet's best surface.

Why are you bringing up what Gasquet did 3 years ago? He's done squat since, while Ferrero has been solid on all 3 surfaces, and he reached the QFs last year at Wimby.


In 2008,he beat players like Fish and Ancic and only lost to Murray in 1/8 final in the circumstances we all know.
In 2009,he wasn't allowed to play grass season.

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 10:34 PM
Gasquet's quicker reflexes and better touch at the net,not to mention his ability to hit powerful backhands on low- slice balls makes him at least as dangerous on grass as Djokovic.
Grass is by far Djokovic's worst surface while it's by far Gasquet's best surface.



In 2008,he beat players like Fish and Ancic and only lost to Murray in 1/8 final in the circumstances we all know.
In 2009,he wasn't allowed to play grass season.
True, but I stand by what I have said. Djokovic, and all of those other players I said are even bigger favourites this year than Gasquet.

yuri27
05-30-2010, 10:39 PM
True, but I stand by what I have said. Djokovic, and all of those other players I said are even bigger favourites this year than Gasquet.

We'll see ;)

Sapeod
05-30-2010, 10:41 PM
We will.

Sophocles
05-30-2010, 10:41 PM
Gasquet has been one of the best grass-courters but it's not clear he's back to his best yet. Aside from Federer, Nadal, Roddick, & Murray, good grass-court players are Haas, Djokovic, Hewitt, Soderling, Berdych, Nalbandian, Ancic. Guys like Ferrero, Gonzalez, & Baghdatis can also play on it.

BigJohn
05-30-2010, 10:45 PM
I voted other, but 12 votes for Murray? Can anyone check to see how many accounts are linked to Simon Reed?

yuri27
05-30-2010, 10:45 PM
Gasquet has been one of the best grass-courters but it's not clear he's back to his best yet. Aside from Federer, Nadal, Roddick, & Murray, good grass-court players are Haas, Djokovic, Hewitt, Soderling, Berdych, Nalbandian, Ancic. Guys like Ferrero, Gonzalez, & Baghdatis can also play on it.

Agree with that.
But what i've seen in the first two sets against Murray one week ago makes me think he is ready to again do some damage on grass.
At his best,he is truly amazing on grass(that BH is just a nightmare on grass for his opponents).
I can't think of many players who are capable of playing better tennis on grass than what he did against Roddick in 2007 and Murray for two sets and half in 2008.

marcRD
05-30-2010, 10:55 PM
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:



You've got to be laughing,right??
Gasquet has regularly been as good if not better than Djokovic on Grass.
Do you even picture Djokovic beating Roddick on grass for instance??
That's too bad the grass season is so short as it would be obvious for anyone otherwise.

Djokovic has fairly similar results on grass to Gasquet, 1 QF and 1 SF and also went finals in Halle and Queens. I think he is more dangerous on grass for a player like Nadal for instance than Gasquet, that match against Roddick was the greatest match in Gasquet's career, I can see Djokovic defeating Roddick in Wimbledon but he would probably be 30/70 against him, as a matter of fact I can see Djokovic beating Murray and Nadal too in Wimbledon, its only Federer that I cant see beeing beaten by Djokovic (or Gasquet).

yuri27
05-30-2010, 11:11 PM
Djokovic has fairly similar results on grass to Gasquet, 1 QF and 1 SF and also went finals in Halle and Queens. I think he is more dangerous on grass for a player like Nadal for instance than Gasquet, that match against Roddick was the greatest match in Gasquet's career, I can see Djokovic defeating Roddick in Wimbledon but he would probably be 30/70 against him, as a matter of fact I can see Djokovic beating Murray and Nadal too in Wimbledon, its only Federer that I cant see beeing beaten by Djokovic (or Gasquet).

Wrong,he played at a better level against Federer and Nadal in MC 2005 and against Murray at Wimbledon 2008

marcRD
05-30-2010, 11:15 PM
Wrong,he played at a better level against Federer and Nadal in MC 2005 and against Murray at Wimbledon 2008

Against Federer I dont agree, against Nadal I dont agree and against Murray I really dont agree. Let us agree to not agree.

fran70
05-30-2010, 11:15 PM
I wouldn`t say that Murray is going to win but definitely he is one of the favourites to win along with Roger, Roddick and Rafa. I expect a good performance of Isner and Querrey too.