Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,506 Posts
Hard to say really. Federer has looked dire on the surface over the last couple of years, but has had the winnings of this match-up in recent times (although Murray was dreadful at Cincinnati and the WTF).

It's not far from being a 50-50 match in my book.
 

·
Lurrrkin'
Joined
·
18,058 Posts
Fed in 4
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,568 Posts
Murray would wipe the floor with 2015 Federer on clay. Let's be realistic. Federer has been an absolute mug on the surface since 2013.
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
This. Clayray 3.0 would never lose to peak Federer.
Clayray might lose one out of 10 matches, but its obvious who would prevail most of the times. Rome Clayray 2.0 [2011] almost beat Djokovic without any external factors, unlike Federer who mostly relies on them. I say Clayray 3.0 is a heavy favorite against Federer even if it goes to 5.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,528 Posts
Right now obviously Murray but peak Federer would easily beat Murray. Let's not pretend that Nadal was great in that Madrid final. He wasn't. It was one of his most dire performances on clay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Clayray might lose one out of 10 matches, but its obvious who would prevail most of the times. Rome Clayray 2.0 [2011] almost beat Djokovic without any external factors, unlike Federer who mostly relies on them. I say Clayray 3.0 is a heavy favorite against Federer even if it goes to 5.
Are you referring to the W/O, the most pathetic excuse ever?



On topic, if we're talking peak then Federer of course. If it's now then Murray.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,633 Posts
Andy should not lose to him on any surface in 5 sets.
Unfortunately for Murray, Fed mostly hasn't needed 5 sets to win a match against him. I believe winning the first 2 of 3, or the first 3 of 5, or winning in 4, are all still valid wins :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
Unfortunately for Murray, Fed mostly hasn't needed 5 sets to win a match against him. I believe winning the first 2 of 3, or the first 3 of 5, or winning in 4, are all still valid wins :lol:
Remind me, what's their head to head again?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Unfortunately for Murray, Fed mostly hasn't needed 5 sets to win a match against him. I believe winning the first 2 of 3, or the first 3 of 5, or winning in 4, are all still valid wins :lol:
Federer is miles better than Murray on any surface. For a long time, he played Murray idiotically. But in their past few matches, he has shown how he should have played someone like Andy. But he is old. It's going to be hard for Roger to keep up with these younger guys even in best of 3 sets matches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
Let me tell you ... you win something 'big' and people talk about it. Expect more threads about Murray :).
He doesn't even need to be winning considering the inordinate amount of threads made about him.

Regarding the thread, they may never meet on clay but it would be intriguing if they did. Probably Murray at current levels, but Federer is capable of surprising still.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
LOL Murray hype reaches another level. This is just silly.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top