MensTennisForums.com - View Single Post - 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

View Single Post

Old 01-17-2013, 02:21 PM   #103
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,934
Sophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond reputeSophocles has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoon20 View Post
Djokovic is the most competitive by far and Fed was also a good clay player not amazing but not bad by any means. I wouldn't be surprised if Djokovic wins RG within 2 years. If one player can outside Nadal it's Djo.
But that doesn't even matter. I just facepalm whenever people separate surfaces to get their points across in H2H statistics it's really a facepalm moment. That's just making lame excuses.
Remember Djokovic Nadal in 2011 ? Djokovic simply dominated. His H2H was what ? 10-0 ? I lost count how many times Nadal lost against Djokovic. At one point he won like 7 straight and most in important events and half of them in finals of a GS. Sometimes you have to take it like a man and accept it instead of making excuses. It would be lame for me to do what you did and go ''well his H2H is skewed because if we take out hardcourts bla bla bla....''.

My post isn't even about Andy it's the arguments people use when talking about H2Hs.
I like Andy a lot. I know people like to hate on this guy but outside of Fed, Rafa, Nole he is the only player that pushes the top 3 to their max. The more competitive players there are in the top 10 the better it is for tennis.
Nobody is competitive against Nadal on clay. Djoker is probably the most competitive given his 2 convincing wins in a row last year & his record is what? 2 wins & something like 13 losses, including the last 3. Fed has 2 wins in 14 matches. My point is not that clay should somehow be discounted or that we should disregard Nadal's domination of the surface. It is simply that it is irrelevant to the point at issue - whether there is a Big 4 including Muzza - because 0-4 isn't much worse than 2-13 or 2-12, so Murray's not that much worse than the other 2 against Nadal on clay. His H2H off clay is worse, being slightly behind when Djoker & Fed are slightly ahead, & there's no doubt that Murray's H2H with Nadal is the worst of any H2H between the Big 4, but so what? H2H with Nadal isn't the most important factor in assessing a player's status in the game, & in any case nobody doubts that if there is a Big 4, Murray is the 4th member. I really can't understand why people are allowing GSMNadull's extreme Nadulltardism to distract them.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote