[FiBeR]

not a murray fan.. but i think his SF loss in wimbledon is the one to win this.

Playing in his backyard, and in a Grand Slam semis against a player whose style favours Murray and still lost it

that's his most painful one i think. Besides the rest of the non slam arent that painful cos he already won a TMS (M1000).

He did pretty well by getting to RG QFs (though he had a quite an open draw to the final) and at the AO and USO it was early to tell how would he had done if advanced further.

[Clydey]

Originally Posted by Goldenoldie

Thank you. If the mods are unhappy with this thread being in General Messages they can move it.

I am very pleased with the mostly sensible responses so far.
Just a bit surprised that the Roddick loss at Wimbledon is top of the poll at the moment. That one didn't really bother me, because Roddick is an excellent grass court player, and he was on fire. Yes, Murray had chances to win, but the better player on the day won.

My own vote was for Indian Wells where he was blown away by a combination of Nadal and the wind. Up to that time I had believed one of Murray's greatest strengths was his ability to adapt to different conditions. That loss demonstrated how much he still had to learn.

The only thing that bothered me about the IW loss is that people seemed determined to ignore the part the wind played. As it is, I don't think it was a significant loss. The only thing that proved, in my opinion, is that Nadal can player better in 40mph winds.

I knew that before the match anyway. I posted on the MW forum that Murray had no chance, as I was watching the women's final that was going on just prior to the men coming on. The conditions were farcical and it ended up being a case of who could keep the ball in court the longest. And I'd always favour Nadal under those circcumstances.

[Burrow]

Originally Posted by Clydey

The only thing that bothered me about the IW loss is that people seemed determined to ignore the part the wind played. As it is, I don't think it was a significant loss. The only thing that proved, in my opinion, is that Nadal can player better in 40mph winds.

I knew that before the match anyway. I posted on the MW forum that Murray had no chance, as I was watching the women's final that was going on just prior to the men coming on. The conditions were farcical and it ended up being a case of who could keep the ball in court the longest. And I'd always favour Nadal under those circcumstances.

That's what tennis is about these days, anyway

[~*BGT*~]

Originally Posted by Corey Feldman

GTFO and mods delete this post!!

Still hurts dear?

[gusavo]

Originally Posted by Clydey

The only thing that bothered me about the IW loss is that people seemed determined to ignore the part the wind played. As it is, I don't think it was a significant loss. The only thing that proved, in my opinion, is that Nadal can player better in 40mph winds.

I knew that before the match anyway. I posted on the MW forum that Murray had no chance

I gree it wasnt significant, it was as far away from being called a tennis match as just about any match ive seen.
you didnt know it, the odds were very even

[Clydey]

Originally Posted by gusavo

I gree it wasnt significant, it was as far away from being called a tennis match as just about any match ive seen.
you didnt know it, the odds were very even

I did know it. I stated before the match that Murray could not beat Nadal in thos conditions. And I was right.

[gusavo]

Originally Posted by Clydey

I did know it. I stated before the match that Murray could not beat Nadal in thos conditions. And I was right.

you didnt know it.
I stated that there would be a terrorist attack the day before in 2001, and I was right. I knew it.

[Clydey]

Originally Posted by gusavo

you didnt know it.
I stated that there would be a terrorist attack the day before in 2001, and I was right. I knew it.

Oh for goodness sake, let's not be too strict when interpreting people's posts. Of course I didn't know for certain. I don't know anything for certain. Let's just say that I was utterly convinced that Murray had very little chance in that match.

[gusavo]

Originally Posted by Clydey

Oh for goodness sake, let's not be too strict when interpreting people's posts. Of course I didn't know for certain. I don't know anything for certain. Let's just say that I was utterly convinced that Murray had very little chance in that match.

so thats why the odds were around even just before the match started? I GUARANTEE you that you will be making millions at betting within years if what you say is true, so if you really believe what you are saying, you should start betting now. consult any good sportsbetter and he will tell you that if you really can do something like that, he will agree with me. and then the question will be if you believe yourself enough to start.

[BIGMARAT]

this has to be in the player forum is subjected to Murray fans only.

admin, please move!

[Clydey]

Originally Posted by gusavo

so thats why the odds were around even just before the match started? I GUARANTEE you that you will be making millions at betting within years if what you say is true, so if you really believe what you are saying, you should start betting now. consult any good sportsbetter and he will tell you that if you really can do something like that, he will agree with me. and then the question will be if you believe yourself enough to start.

What are you talking about? All I'm saying is that I had a firm belief that Murray was not going to win that match. And yes, I would have bet a lot of money on it.

[Mellow Yellow]

http://www.menstennisforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=436

[gusavo]

Originally Posted by Clydey

What are you talking about? All I'm saying is that I had a firm belief that Murray was not going to win that match. And yes, I would have bet a lot of money on it.

if you would get into betting you would lose a lot because you obviously dont know how it works. as I said, if you truly believe what you are saying your winrate would make you millions. so what should the cutoff point in odds had been according to you?

[Clydey]

Originally Posted by gusavo

if you would get into betting you would lose a lot because you obviously dont know how it works. as I said, if you truly believe what you are saying your winrate would make you millions. so what should the cutoff point in odds had been according to you?

Seriously, what have you been smoking? You're ranting and raving so much that I no longer have any idea what you're talking about.

I told you that I stated prior to the IW final that I didn't think Murray stood much of a chance against Nadal in those conditions, and now you are apparently flaming me about betting odds. Get a grip, dude. You're a rebel without a cause or a clue.

[McAlistar]

Annoyed at them all but wasnt too bothered, except the Verdasco match in Australia. Took a while to get over that one simply because i never believed he would lose.