33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"? - Page 7 - MensTennisForums.com

MensTennisForums.com

MenstennisForums.com is the premier Men's Tennis forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.Please Register - It's Free!

View Poll Results: Does Murray have the right to be referred to as being part of a "big four"?

Yes 46 51.11%
Nope 30 33.33%
No, he needs X (arbitary) number of slams to be there 14 15.56%
Voters: 90. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 01-17-2013, 12:26 PM   #91
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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 GSMnadal View Post
And why would that show Murray is competitive with Nadal? To play all of the matches on his best turf and Nadal's worst and still end up as a pigeon? To completely eliminate one of the three surfaces where Nadal just happens to excel?

Fact is, it's 13-5, most of the matches were played on Murray's best surface and Rafa's worst, Nadal is ahead on clay, grass, hardcourt and in big games. Murray is his bitch and is in no way competitive.
Nadal has a significant advantage in the match-up, no doubt. But to say Murray "is in no way competitive" is demonstrably untrue. To be in no way competitive, Murray would have to lose every match in straight sets, whereas in fact, he has won several (big) matches, and troubled the scoreboard considerably in several he has lost. You are exaggerating to the point of absurdity. Compared to the vast majority of players on the tour, Murray has a respectable record against Nadal, a good record against Djoker, and a superb record against Federer, plus, rather more importantly - & I know how hard it is for a Nadulltard to look beyond H2Hs - he is much closer to the No. 2 than the No. 5 in terms of ranking points, big titles, and consistency in slams.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 01-17-2013, 12:27 PM   #92
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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 arm View Post
That is not a valid argument, to be honest, given that they played a lot more outside clay than on clay. And yeah, clay counts too.
The point is that Murray's record against Nadal, while far from stellar, is far superior to nearly every other player's. Nadal also has significant H2H leads against the other 2 in the big 4.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:32 PM   #93
country flag Saberq
Registered User
 
Saberq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,983
Saberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq has a reputation beyond reputeSaberq 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 Sophocles View Post
The point is that Murray's record against Nadal, while far from stellar, is far superior to nearly every other player's. Nadal also has significant H2H leads against the other 2 in the big 4.
not that big against Novak
Saberq is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:55 PM   #94
country flag The Fearhand
Registered User
 
The Fearhand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,187
The Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Look at Djokovic before 2011 and after. I expect the same for Murray though not as well as Djokovic.
It's a matter of time before Murray collects more slams.

Murray is unlucky though for years he faced Fed,Nadal and then comes along Djokovic dominating and still is.
Nadal is injured, gone. Fed is nearing the end but now he's facing Djokovic in his prime. Otherwise he'd have A LOT more slams. Tough.
The Fearhand is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:58 PM   #95
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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 Saberq View Post
not that big against Novak
Using MTF terminology Novak is still Nadull's pigeon. Of course in reality Nole is now the favourite anywhere off clay, but that just reflects the limited value of these historical H2H records in assessing a player's current status in the game.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:21 PM   #96
country flag The Fearhand
Registered User
 
The Fearhand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,187
The Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand 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 Sophocles View Post
To some extent, yes. If those matches had been on hard courts the H2H would probably be 7-11. No active player is competitive with Nadal on clay.
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.
The Fearhand is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:46 PM   #97
country flag The Fearhand
Registered User
 
The Fearhand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,187
The Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand 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 Corey Feldman View Post
he's the best player in the world right now
The world no.1 laughingly disagrees with you.

The Fearhand is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:47 PM   #98
country flag arm
Registered User
 
arm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 27,858
arm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm has a reputation beyond reputearm 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 Sophocles View Post
The point is that Murray's record against Nadal, while far from stellar, is far superior to nearly every other player's. Nadal also has significant H2H leads against the other 2 in the big 4.
I'm sorry? Nole has played Nadal a total of 14 times on clay. and the H2H is 14-19...

Murray played him 4 times on clay and the H2H is 5-13.

How can you even comapre the H2H.

Only a fool would say Murray is not a part of the big 4. But I don't think you have a point with this H2H argument.
arm is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 01:52 PM   #99
country flag uxyzapenje
Registered User
 
uxyzapenje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: At home.
Posts: 4,573
uxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje 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 BauerAlmeida View Post
No. Before 2011 when Djokovic had a career like the one Murray has now nobody talked about a big 3, they talked about Fedal.

It wasn't untill Novak started dominating, reached N1, won multiple slams and defeated Federer and Nadal in multiple ocassions in the same year that people started talking about the BIG 3.

Murray needs a few more slams and some weeks at N1 (and a year end) for a TOP 4 to exist. The other 3 are clearly above him.
This is true. Still, it depends on how you look at it. In terms of being 'too hard for most opponents to beat' and being an (almost) equal opponent in most of their H2H matches, then yes, there is a big4.

If you look at it through achievements, then no. As BA said in the quoted post, nobody was talking about the 'big3' in 2009/2010 even tho Novak had 1 Slam + Slam final, bunch of Masters, WTF title, #2 career high ranking and many smaller titles... All of the Fedalovic (that's how you call it) had (shorter or longer) periods of absolute dominance and everybody knew that that one player was the best in the world. Murray was never best in the world, never the #1 favorite in any Slam...

Define what you mean by 'big4' and you'll have your answer.
__________________
Djokovic | Tipsarevic | Querrey
uxyzapenje is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:00 PM   #100
country flag The Fearhand
Registered User
 
The Fearhand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,187
The Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond reputeThe Fearhand has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

From a competitive standpoint - YES. Murray belongs in the top 4.
From a career standpoint - NOT YET. Not yet meaning he will. It's just a matter of time before he collects more slams.

I think the OP meant to say from a competitive standpoint.
The Fearhand is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:07 PM   #101
country flag uxyzapenje
Registered User
 
uxyzapenje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: At home.
Posts: 4,573
uxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje has a reputation beyond reputeuxyzapenje 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
From a competitive standpoint - YES. Murray belongs in the top 4.
From a career standpoint - NOT YET. Not yet meaning he will. It's just a matter of time before he collects more slams.

I think the OP meant to say from a competitive standpoint.

But if he meant to to say from a competitive standpoint, then why would no. of Slams matter? I mean, then we should only look at level of play and partially their H2Hs, not # of Slams... But the # of Slams is contained in the thread title, so I would say it's the other way around. Or he just wanted to troll, that's the 3rd option...
__________________
Djokovic | Tipsarevic | Querrey
uxyzapenje is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:09 PM   #102
country flag SliceAce
Registered User
 
SliceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Age: 23
Posts: 2,271
SliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond reputeSliceAce has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

GSM Nadull is right (for once). Murray was semi-competitive with Nadal in the past, the problem is he's been going backwards and his game hasn't really improved, not has his mental strength. If he was ever competitive with Nadal, he isn't anymore and his making the Wimbledon and USO finals was all because of the hole Nadal left. In the past, you had to beat 2/3 of Nadal/Fed/Djokovic to win a slam which made it so difficult. Only Del Potro managed to do it and even then just barely (requiring Chokerer to show up). To make the Wimbledon final, he beat Tsonga after Nadal lost. To make the USO final he beat Berdych after Fed lost.

That's not to say his win wasn't legitimate (it wasn't legitimate for other reasons) but it does show he hasn't really had the chance to show improvement. He faced a dead tired Fed in the OG finals (who already had his gold and silver medals), he got crushed at Wimbledon, he actually got worse at MS events, and he choked as hard as he could after being given 2 sets in the USO final in unplayable conditions and Djokovic just ran out of gas. He has yet to show he has any chance against Nadal or that he improved after his USO, showing the same attitude and pushing at the WTF. Everybody goes on about Lendl, but Murray is playing the same and Lendl is probably a similar coach to Brad Gilbert who made no difference for Murray. Personally, I think Murray is uncoachable because of his bad attitude and mystifying pushing style despite his potential power.
SliceAce is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 03:21 PM   #103
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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
Old 01-17-2013, 03:23 PM   #104
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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 arm View Post
I'm sorry? Nole has played Nadal a total of 14 times on clay. and the H2H is 14-19...

Murray played him 4 times on clay and the H2H is 5-13.

How can you even comapre the H2H.

Only a fool would say Murray is not a part of the big 4. But I don't think you have a point with this H2H argument.
Murray's H2H against Nadal is marginally worse than Fed's & significantly worse than Djoker's, but it is still better than most players' outside Davydenko, & H2H against Nadal is a relatively unimportant factor. My beef is with the "fools" who are trying to make out Muzza's H2H against Nadal debars him from any Top 4.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 03:26 PM   #105
country flag Sophocles
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 40
Posts: 8,947
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 SliceAce View Post
GSM Nadull is right (for once). Murray was semi-competitive with Nadal in the past, the problem is he's been going backwards and his game hasn't really improved, not has his mental strength. If he was ever competitive with Nadal, he isn't anymore and his making the Wimbledon and USO finals was all because of the hole Nadal left. In the past, you had to beat 2/3 of Nadal/Fed/Djokovic to win a slam which made it so difficult. Only Del Potro managed to do it and even then just barely (requiring Chokerer to show up). To make the Wimbledon final, he beat Tsonga after Nadal lost. To make the USO final he beat Berdych after Fed lost.

That's not to say his win wasn't legitimate (it wasn't legitimate for other reasons) but it does show he hasn't really had the chance to show improvement. He faced a dead tired Fed in the OG finals (who already had his gold and silver medals), he got crushed at Wimbledon, he actually got worse at MS events, and he choked as hard as he could after being given 2 sets in the USO final in unplayable conditions and Djokovic just ran out of gas. He has yet to show he has any chance against Nadal or that he improved after his USO, showing the same attitude and pushing at the WTF. Everybody goes on about Lendl, but Murray is playing the same and Lendl is probably a similar coach to Brad Gilbert who made no difference for Murray. Personally, I think Murray is uncoachable because of his bad attitude and mystifying pushing style despite his potential power.
I suggest we wait and see what happens in Murray's next match against Nadal. Before last year Murray wasn't beating Fed & Djoker in best-of-5 matches; Nadal has not been the only obstacle in the way of big titles.
__________________
"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios