Mens Tennis Forums banner

Murray

More legitimate Grand Slam Title! Murray V Del GOATro

6K views 94 replies 57 participants last post by  stewietennis 
#1 ·
Poll to follow.
 
#44 ·
Both won the US Open which in itself is a legitimate grand slam title...

If you're asking if either one was a fluke, then...again no. Del Potro beat two of the top four on his way to the title and Murray has proved his isn't a fluke by being in various slam finals, and winning the Olympics. He's obviously not a fluke champion. The title of the threat makes little sense.
 
#46 ·
obviously Del Potro had the more impressive winning route and like circumstances!! BUT then again Murray is more proven as far as Grand Slam success SO. I voted Del Potro because singularly his seemed like more impressive. but it's like pancakes and waffles, both are great, how can you possibly have a more legitimate Grand Slam title, waffles and pancakes are both breakfast foods, just like those two US Open titles are both equally titles they have on their resumes, fair and square
 
#49 ·
The Chardy match didn't count. From very reliable sources, I have heard Del Goatro was nursing a broken nail injury that he got while doing his weekly manicure. He was playing at 14.675% during this AO :yeah:
 
#53 ·
This was not one of those instances though, there's nothing sensible about such nonsense.
 
#64 ·
Well, Del Potro had tougher opponents to deal with (Fed and Nadal back to back), so in that sense you can say his grand slam title is more "legitimate" than Murray's...HOWEVER, Murray's been in 6 other grand slam finals whereas Del Potro has reached zero since his success in New York. Also, Murray has numerous masters titles whereas Del Potro has zero. So, Murray definitely deserved his grand slam title more than Del Potro from that point of view.
 
#75 ·
Read thread title again. This time try harder.

DelPo obviously. He beat Fed and Nadal and was pretty dominant. Not to take anything away from Murray but if you compare both USO slams and if you'd favor one over the other in terms of tougher road and value DelPo's is imo ahead to Murrays. And it's not even close.
 
#68 ·
I'm not getting the question. Did Murray or Del Potro cheat or play foul or do anything else that would question the legitimacy of their titles?

Maybe "impressive" is the more adequate word?

Btw, I recall that Nadal was injured when he lost the US Open semifinal to Del Potro. This said, Del Potro's tournament victory was impressive, being the first player to break into the Federer/Nadal duopoly. He hasn't been quite the same after his injury break.

Murray's title was impressive too, not at least because of the final against Djokovic. As Del Potro, he was a tad lucky in the semifinal, the wind certainly helped him more than Berdych.
 
#78 ·
Eh. He didn't face a BP for the first 3 sets against Federer and he owns Soderling. He played fantastic in his first GS final, unlike Soda who played badly in both, so yes, he had a very strong chance of wining RG.
 
#72 ·
Legitimate in different ways. DelPo played a better tournament than Muzz to win USO. But looking at their whole career, it'd be a bigger injustice if Muzz lacked a slam.
 
#81 ·
Murray, because he is the better and more consistent player.. Del Potro got a good matchup against Fed and won it one time.. but has been mighty quiet since then, Murray at least consistently makes semis and slam finals along with winning the occasional masters.
 
#83 ·
Delpo had to defeat Null and Federer at the age of 20... without wind :rolleyes:

"If" one of these titles is more legitime than the other, that's Delpo's for sure.
 
#85 ·
What is this?Amateur comedy night?It's GOATro and it's not even close.Denaying Muger one more Grand Slam,the guy should've been knighted by the queen.
 
#86 ·
This thread is more legit than both slams combined. Both of them are so shit it's trivial to even bother deciding which stinks worse.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top