Thread Tools

out_grinder · 02-12-2012, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawrenceOfTennis

Totally pointless. He would have forced Nadal to 5 in my opinion but would have lost it.

No way.

I think Nadal would have it easy in 3 with bakery thrown in.

stewietennis · 02-12-2012, 08:42 PM

During the fifth set of the Murray-Djokovic semi final, I seriously thought Murray could have beaten Nadal if he made it through. Looking back though, and remembering the that 4th set "give up" (it wasn't even a collapse, Murray just gave up – served and didn't move, didn't go for shots that were two feet away), Nadal would have eventually prevailed in four sets.

ballbasher101 · 02-12-2012, 08:58 PM

Pains me to say this but Nadal would have won for sure. Against Nadal Murray just collapses. Murray needs to remove the mental hold Nadal has over him. The only way to do that is to win 4 or 5 matches in a row against Nadal just like Djokovic did. As it stands the only thing Nadal expects when he plays Murray is a victory.

leng jai · 02-12-2012, 09:03 PM

Anyone saying Murray with any conviction is just delusional.

Ajde.

delboy · 02-12-2012, 10:50 PM

Would have been an interesting match...if he played like he did against djoker and didn't bottle it then sure he could have won.

Houstonko · 02-13-2012, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroTree123

He was tired though seriously, you noobs can't admit that. Murray lucked his way to the final in US Open 2008.....but I think he earned his runs to the finals in AO 10 and 11.

US08 was very fast. In fast surface Nadal and Djoker can't dominate, as simple as that. Today 2 persons playing clay court tennis are dominating. I don't believe defense and endurance are the new evolution, the courts are the cause of it.

Houstonko · 02-13-2012, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewietennis

During the fifth set of the Murray-Djokovic semi final, I seriously thought Murray could have beaten Nadal if he made it through. Looking back though, and remembering the that 4th set "give up" (it wasn't even a collapse, Murray just gave up – served and didn't move, didn't go for shots that were two feet away), Nadal would have eventually prevailed in four sets.

He needs to change his mentality to frontrunner's. He is not used to leading the match but very good at chasing.

MIMIC · 02-13-2012, 06:48 AM

LOL, hell no.

Perhaps Djoker did him a favor, saving him from the embarrassment of going 0-4 in slam finals.

Alex999 · 02-13-2012, 09:32 AM

I don't know. Murray was very well prepared. Even that he lost to Nole, he has nothing to be ashamed of. I think that he can beat Nadal. I mean he did beat him at the USO...

Super Djoker · 02-13-2012, 02:29 PM

Big fat no !

swebright · 02-13-2012, 02:39 PM

No way x 1000

Sophocles · 02-13-2012, 03:01 PM

Had he played at the same level, then yes, he would have had every chance. Would he have played at the same level against Nadal in a slam final? That is more doubtful.

He's beaten Nadal in slams but he hasn't done it for a while. Hell, even Federer's beaten Nadal twice in slams. Nobody seriously expects him to do it again.

fivebargate · 02-13-2012, 04:18 PM

He would have been in with a shout for sure. We know he has done well against Nadal on this surface....and he looked like a different player mentally out there. The danger would always have been that he didn't feel fresh for the final and subsequently was overwhelmed by a Nadal faking super freshness as he does so well. I kinda think with Lendl onside that those days are past now....and expect to see Murray make inroads with Nadal....maybe even a clay win against hime en route to Paris.

NJ88 · 02-13-2012, 04:32 PM

Murray was more impressive vs. Nole. He was pretty much points away from beating a pretty much fresh Djokovic. Nadal couldnt beat a Djokovic who had just been playing a five hour marathon vs. Murray.

out_grinder · 02-13-2012, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJ88

Murray was more impressive vs. Nole. He was pretty much points away from beating a pretty much fresh Djokovic. Nadal couldnt beat a Djokovic who had just been playing a five hour marathon vs. Murray.

No way was Murray more impressive against Djokovic.

The only reason people think Murray does well against Djokovic is because Djokovic is ALWAYS exhausted by the time he reaches Murray.

Djokovic had an epic with Ferrer in the 2012 AO before meeting Murray, and had an epic battle with Soderling before they met in 2011 Rome.

If they met on equal terms, you'd have to be a blatant Murray-tard not to realize that Djokovic would not lose more than 2 games per set.

Think about it, Djokovic is regularly schooling Nadal. But Nadal is regularly schooling Murray. So why would Djokovic struggle more against the guy that is regularly schooled by the guy he regularly schools?