Mens Tennis Forums banner

Ferrero on clay vs Murray on grass


  • Total voters
    40
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
It's time to rate Murray correctly on grass, since lot of hype from Media.

Amazing similarities-

1) Both won their slams in weakest possible competition.
( 2003- Transitional Era, 2013- Vacuum era with 0 promising youngster + Two greatest grass courters of era falling early due to injury/decline )

2) Ferrero has lot of clay titles while Murray has 3 prestigious ( self declared from Media ) Queens title.

3) Ferrero lost final in 2002 and won RG in 2003, like Murray lost final in 2012 and won Wimbledon in 2013.

When it comes to greatness Murray stands at same or lower position of Ferrero on clay.

Comparison with grass GOAT, Nadal is stupid talk, and media hype job.

What you think?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Ferrero is of much lower quality than Murray. Stop hating on Murray. Ferrero would never straight set someone of the caliber of DJoker on a GS, despite of the surface he was playing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
Ferrero is of much lower quality than Murray. Stop hating on Murray. Ferrero would never straight set someone of the caliber of DJoker on a GS, despite of the surface he was playing.
What gives you idea about Ferrero's quality? He was 21st No 1 in history, which Murray will never achieve. If world no 1 player was lower quality, then other players are utter garbage.

Ferrero on clay-

1 RG

1 RG final

4 Masters on clay ( Bo5 Final )

2 Masters Final

Total 14 Clay titles.

Actually Murray's achievements on grass are below Ferrero's on clay. Still you think Murray > Ferrero?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
212 Posts
As of now, Ferrero's achievements on clay are better than Murray's achievements on grass, and he probably could have achieved much more had he not suffered from injuries and illness.

If Murray wins another Wimbledon, then I will consider his achievements better.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
What gives you idea about Ferrero's quality? He was 21st No 1 in history, which Murray will never achieve. If world no 1 player was lower quality, then other players are utter garbage.

Ferrero on clay-

1 RG

1 RG final

4 Masters on clay ( Bo5 Final )

2 Masters Final

Total 14 Clay titles.

Actually Murray's achievements on grass are below Ferrero's on clay. Still you think Murray > Ferrero?
Because there are less grass tournaments than clay ones. you can only compare GS vs GS, and murray has 1 GS, 1F and 3 SF and 1 QF and the olympic gold. Ferrero had 1GS, 1F and 2 SF, then for 9 years in a row he didnt get past of 3rd round, a complete joke.. Ferrero had a very short span of winning on clay, Murray has been consistent for a longer period with slighty better achievements on the surface..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Because there are less grass tournaments than clay ones. you can only compare GS vs GS, and murray has 1 GS, 1F and 3 SF and 1 QF and the olympic gold. Ferrero had 1GS, 1F and 2 SF, then for 9 years in a row he didnt get past of 3rd round, a complete joke.. Ferrero had a very short span of winning on clay, Murray has been consistent for a longer period with slighty better achievements on the surface..
Hey don't try derail the topic, Talk strictly regarding grass achievements.

1W, 1F, 4 Masters > 1W, 1W, 3 250, 1 Olympic Gold ( Which is lesser event than masters with BO5 Final
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Hey don't try derail the topic, Talk strictly regarding grass achievements.

1W, 1F, 4 Masters > 1W, 1W, 3 250, 1 Olympic Gold ( Which is lesser event than masters with BO5 Final
Because there are no masters on grass, the clay seasson is much longer...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Because there are no masters on grass, the clay seasson is much longer...
I know Murray would've won 2-4 grass masters but still 14 titles with 1 slam, 4 masters heavier than Murray's grass resume.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #10

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
actually currently decent comparison but I would never compare Ferrero with Murray, Andrew is a much better overall player
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
actually currently decent comparison but I would never compare Ferrero with Murray, Andrew is a much better overall player
I don't on which basis you're claiming this. Ferrero was world no 1 player a very talented shot maker

But it's expected as many of posters didn't witnessed that, bias is coming from impression of current players.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Also don't forget that both players had pathetically easy draws en route to the title. Ferrero only faced 1 top 10 player the entire tournament (Costa, who had played a 5 setter the day before). Likewise, Murray only had to face 1 top 10 player the entire tournament (Djokovic, who had also played a 5 setter the previous round)

And, ironically enough, both nearly choked it away in the QF. Murray was down 2 sets to Verdasco (that match still gives me chills, disgusting tennis from both guys and a disgusting crowd) and yet managed to come back. Ferrero also had to tough out a 5-setter against Gonzalez, who had all the momentum going into the final set.

I commend you for making a very legitimate comparison. I actually had never considered this, but the two are relatively comparable in that regard. Still, a title is a title, no matter how you slice it, so credit to both of them for taking advantage of the situation and winning it all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Also don't forget that both players had pathetically easy draws en route to the title. Ferrero only faced 1 top 10 player the entire tournament (Costa, who had played a 5 setter the day before). Likewise, Murray only had to face 1 top 10 player the entire tournament (Djokovic, who had also played a 5 setter the previous round)

And, ironically enough, both nearly choked it away in the QF. Murray was down 2 sets to Verdasco (that match still gives me chills, disgusting tennis from both guys and a disgusting crowd) and yet managed to come back. Ferrero also had to tough out a 5-setter against Gonzalez, who had all the momentum going into the final set.

I commend you for making a very legitimate comparison. I actually had never considered this, but the two are relatively comparable in that regard. Still, a title is a title, no matter how you slice it, so credit to both of them for taking advantage of the situation and winning it all.

Pretty much sums up. It's legitimate comparison considering ridiculously weak competition but Ferrero didn't have BBC honouring him spoty for clown achievements nor have idiot media hyping him as Tennis GOD.... :superlol:

These two are best examples of how slam can get vultured but hype was disgraceful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #18

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,242 Posts
What gives you idea about Ferrero's quality? He was 21st No 1 in history, which Murray will never achieve. If world no 1 player was lower quality, then other players are utter garbage.

Ferrero on clay-

1 RG

1 RG final

4 Masters on clay ( Bo5 Final )

2 Masters Final

Total 14 Clay titles.

Actually Murray's achievements on grass are below Ferrero's on clay. Still you think Murray > Ferrero?
Only 3 Masters by my count: Rome '01, Monte Carlo '02, Monte Carlo '03.

EDIT: And only the first two were BO5 final.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Only 3 Masters by my count: Rome '01, Monte Carlo '02, Monte Carlo '03.

EDIT: And only the first two were BO5.
Madrid was hard then. It's 3 masters on clay.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top