[SetSampras]

He has proven he can beat the top 3 in the masters events. And somehow freezes on the big stage and gets frustrated easily against the big 3. But he doesn't have the weapons that Fed/Nadal/Nole have either. He is very good returner, but he doesn't have the big FH, BH and serving, or that one big weapon that the other 3 have.

DO you think its more mental with Murray or is he just not that good to win slams over the top 3

 

[safin-rules-no.1]

I think calling him mental is going a bit far. He's a rubbish hacker.

 

[ossie]

the mens game is too tough to be able to luck out slam win. you need huge game and murray doesnt have it. his fans who believe its all in his head are mental.

 

[Nasi]

You've spelled it out pretty well. He lacks a weapon, but when he's on, doesn't actually seem to need one to get wins. So maybe it's a little bit of both... that you have to be very mentally on to win with the game he's got, so he can only use it to best effect when he's confident and focused.

 

[Gagsquet]

Inferiority complex.
That's why it's big 3 not big 4.

 

[gaitare]

He would have easily beaten Sampras in one of the Wimbledon finals in the 90s, he's just not up for it mentally in this era.

 

[safin-rules-no.1]

He would have easily beaten Sampras in one of the Wimbledon finals in the 90s, he's just not up for it mentally in this era.

:stupid:

 

[EddieNero]

Murray's just the fourt best in the world.
Sort of a transitional player between the elite and fairly good players.
Consistent enough to reach semis in almost every slam, deal with mediocre/weak players, but receives a beat down from a top 3 guy everytime he gets there.
It seems Murray's wins against Nadal in USO 08 and AO 10 are more like flukes than legit victories.

 

[PeakRafa20082010]

The passive play, he's got the shots, got the craftiness, got the technique, got the ability to be aggressive he just doesn't use it until he's two sets down.

 

[MaxPower]

Murray''s problem is that he is a good at most things but not the best at anything.

He is a very good counterpuncher/pusher but not the best. If he plays a superior counterpuncher/pusher he loses (see Nadal)

He can play aggressive tennis vs moonballer/djoker but Murray's aggressive tennis isn't as good as the best aggressive players like Fed, Soderling, Tsonga, Berdych who plays that type of tennis all the time.


Murray need to make a choice. Should he go the path of the aggressive player and start to play like that ALL THE TIME, or should he be happy with the occasional SFs/F and be defeated and only win when the superior pusher is injured/gets taken out by someone else.

Yet another option is if he thinks he can improve his own fitness and speed to be an even better defensive player. We saw that with Djokovic so maybe. Could start by getting one of those space eggs and an oxygen tent and some other things and he might do better in the endurance wars

 

[Roadmap]

Murray's problems are technical followed by mental. He cannot hit a forehand down the line. Not against Nadull. Not against anyone. This means he has less court to aim for. The pressure builds. Errors follow. This opens the door for his mental demons to shine through. Make no mistake though. His problems are primarily technical. It is about time the commentators were honest about this instead of accusing him of being a crackpot when he loses to a better player.

 

[Swiss_Bagels17]

Over a best of 5 set match he is not consistent enough

He has a low first serve percentage

He doesn't have a solid weapon. Serve or Forehand (Not the biggest)

He has the pressure from the media to end the 76 year wait for a Grand Slam winner

The good things about Murray include great shot selection coming into the net is a sold tactic he seems to have good volley skills.

He was very unfortunate to meet Federer in Australia 10 as that really was he's chance as the GOAT hasn't been the same since.

And since Federer has left the top 2 in the world it makes Murray's task harder.

 

[Ben.]

He is good enough. He's reached 3 finals, 5 semis and won 7 out of 8 MS1000 finals. In these runs he has taken out Rafa twice in slams, beaten Federer in two MS1000 finals in straight sets and Djokovic in three MS1000 finals in straight sets. He also has a winning H2H against Federer. This proves that his biggest problem is between the ears. That's not say he would be unbeatable if he sorted it out, there are some problems with his game obviously but constantly dissapearing in slam finals and now the last two semis have nothing to do with his game.

 

[thrust]

The passive play, he's got the shots, got the craftiness, got the technique, got the ability to be aggressive he just doesn't use it until he's two sets down.

I tend to agree that most of his problem in Slams, is mental. He had many chances against Rafa yesterday, but ususlly managed to mess them up. He needs a better coach and to leave his mother at home.

 

[martyn]

Murray's just the fourt best in the world.
Sort of a transitional player between the elite and fairly good players.
Consistent enough to reach semis in almost every slam, deal with mediocre/weak players, but receives a beat down from a top 3 guy everytime he gets there.
It seems Murray's wins against Nadal in USO 08 and AO 10 are more like flukes than legit victories.

This post is beyond retarded. Those were not fluke victories, the simple fact is, Murray is a very very good player but he's not a great player. Hence, if he doesn't bring his A game, he gets dismissed by the top guys at the business end of a slam more often than not.

Whilst not being a huge Murray fan boy, the lack of respect he gets on here is pathetic. Guy is a very good player in a strong era at the top of the game.

 

[xdrewitdajx]

he's good enough...He has a similar game to Djokovic, as far as great speed/movement/defense, return of serve, backhand go...he's even a bit better as far as touch and variety go, slices, net play...when he hits his 1st serve it's usually more lethal than Djokovic's as well.
It's obviously mental with him, because his game IS good enough to win a slam, but in slams his level just seems to drop at the worst times and he fails to take advantage of opportunities. Bad mistakes, low 1st serve percentage, letting emotions get the best of him, failing to take advantage of chances that are presented, etc...all of this is fixable, and it has mostly to do with his mindset and mentality.
Djokovic might win the US Open, and he was staring defeat in the face in the semis...mental fortitude is what got him the win in the end.

 

[BK 201]

He's too defensive to win slams. Pure defensive baseliners with no plan B rarely make it past R16/QF's. To win a slam you need to 'win' it and take it to 'them' (big 3) and Murray is incapable of that. Playing passive against the top guys won't get you far - look at Roddick's pitiful attempt to out slug Nadal. Lol.




If Murray cared to play offensively he might sneak a slam. But that's about it.

 

[Roadmap]

he's good enough...He has a similar game to Djokovic, as far as great speed/movement/defense, return of serve, backhand go...he's even a bit better as far as touch and variety go, slices, net play...when he hits his 1st serve it's usually more lethal than Djokovic's as well.
It's obviously mental with him, because his game IS good enough to win a slam, but in slams his level just seems to drop at the worst times and he fails to take advantage of opportunities. Bad mistakes, low 1st serve percentage, letting emotions get the best of him, failing to take advantage of chances that are presented, etc...all of this is fixable, and it has mostly to do with his mindset and mentality.
Djokovic might win the US Open, and he was staring defeat in the face in the semis...mental fortitude is what got him the win in the end.

Murray would swap his superior slice for fakeinjuryovic's superior forehand down the line. He would also swap his superior volleys for fakepersonalityovic's superior second serve. On modern slow courts volleys are sadly negligible.

 

[TheBoiledEgg]

he's always gonna meet Federer/Rafa or Djokovic in slam SF/F as rest of the mens are completely useless.

Federer won his 1st vs Philippoussis
Nadal won his 1st slam against drugged up Puerta
Djokovic vs Tsonga

 

[green25814]

Its technical. His forehand is flawed. He's just not as good a player as the other three. Therefore he doesn't have the same confidence. He has to be playing brilliantly to beat them. Thats huge pressure.