SirBloody Idiot
Cricketer Of The Year
Probably quite understandable because there has been a marked change (for the better) in his temprament this year.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Tennis Thread
- Thread starter Mister Wright
- Start date
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Yep definitely.
When he was 3-0 up in the first set, and then Nadal broke back to make it 3-3, Soderling would have normally bottled it.
Same when he went a break down in the 2nd set, but he broke back the very next game.
He's a changed man under Magnus Norman as coach.
Davydenko vs. Novak sounds like a tight match btw. Good win for Novak. That's a very tight group, any of the two can go through (though you think Nadal will struggle with his recent form).
When he was 3-0 up in the first set, and then Nadal broke back to make it 3-3, Soderling would have normally bottled it.
Same when he went a break down in the 2nd set, but he broke back the very next game.
He's a changed man under Magnus Norman as coach.
Davydenko vs. Novak sounds like a tight match btw. Good win for Novak. That's a very tight group, any of the two can go through (though you think Nadal will struggle with his recent form).
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Fed vs. Murray on hard court in a best of 3 match?
Almost always guaranteed a 3rd set.
Murray played quite well in that first set, but Fed lifted his game to take the 2nd.
Who will win the third? I can't help but feel this match is on Federer's racquet. If he keeps the forehand errors low, he'll win.
Almost always guaranteed a 3rd set.
Murray played quite well in that first set, but Fed lifted his game to take the 2nd.
Who will win the third? I can't help but feel this match is on Federer's racquet. If he keeps the forehand errors low, he'll win.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nice! Those were great odds. Great that you've seen the light
federer vs murray will always be on federer's racquet...if federer plays anywhere close to his best, it doesn't matter how murray plays, he wouldn't stand a chance....
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd say the same about a lot of players against Murray. His consistency is commendable, but when players like Verdasco, Gonzalez, Roddick and even Cilic were at the top of their game in Grand Slam events last year he struggled.
He always makes his opponent play really well to win, but when the opponent does play really well he finds it hard to match them.
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yep he has, Murray has definitely gone Scottish for the night
don't show how crushed you are...Yep he has, Murray has definitely gone Scottish for the night
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
He ****ing owed me after his lost to Benneteau in Paris. BENNETEAU!Nice! Those were great odds. Great that you've seen the light
JULIEN ****ING BENNETEAU!
Who on Earth can beat Federer consistently, even if Federer plays at his best?
Maybe Nadal back 8 months ago, and perhaps Safin circa 2005. That's about it.
The whole point is you try and make the opposition player not be at his best by peppering balls to their weakness. In Roger's case, the forehand in recent times.
Verdasco playing at his best vs. Murray playing at his best, I back Murray every single time.
You're right regarding perhaps some others (Roddick, JMDP and Fed for sure), but its not as if Murray played well today. He hit 47% first serves FFS and still took Roger to a 3rd set.
You're also disregarding the mental strength of Murray's game (which to be fair tonight, was definitely not on display nor in some of the matches you mention). Even if Gonzo, Cilic or Verdasco were in full flight against Murray, if Murray was serving well and moving well, he'd win 9 times out of 10. Those 3 are mentally fragile as ****.
Tennis isn't just all about hitting winners.
Do you mean the tournament? If so, man I'll never understand this underestimation of the rest of the field from some people. There are 6 players who can win this tournament. Would be 7 if Nadal wasn't hampered by injuries.
Djojkovic just beat Federer in his home town a few weeks ago in a final!
If you mean vs. Murray, then yes. Yes he has won
Last edited:
sure, i completely agree...maybe add a sampras on lightning-fast grass and you have a complete list...
i don't think he can trouble feds enough to make him play badly, if he is not playing well/consistently to start with, murray has the game to take advantage, that's about it...
Last edited:
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
He's played pretty patchy at this tournament. JMDP lost in 3 to Murray, and won in 3 against Verdasco. Plays Roger next.Yeah I meant the match
Haven't been following this tourney much, how did Del Potro fair in his first match(es)?
But he's had injury problems ever since the US Open. To be blunt, he's played ****house ever since he won the thing. But after getting two matches under his belt here, and Federer not needing to win to qualify, he may have a chance. Fed will go in huge favourite though.
Murray vs. Verdasco to me will be a big one. All the pressure on Murray, because if he loses he may not qualify to the semis (depending on JMDP vs. Fed, and sets won etc - a lot of factors to take into account). If he were to not qualify in London after such a consistent season it'd be pretty embarrassing.
Tonight Soderling vs. Novak. Reckon Soderling is a chance despite being 0-5 against Novak. Reckon Novak has played way too much tennis recently. He may tire.
Nadal vs. Davydenko is judgment day for Rafa. If he loses, it'll not only be curtains to the tournament, but he'll go into the Davis Cup final with some ****ty form.
Last edited:
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't know if it's necessarily true all the time, I'm just pointing out that those are the players he lost to in the Slams this year. Verdasco would be the one I'm most convinced of, actually, because his performance against Murray at the Aussie Open was incredible. I firmly believe he'd have beaten anyone that day. Verdasco was a hair's breadth from making the final in that tournament, remember.
Gonzalez and Roddick tend to overpower him a bit when their shots are coming off. Cilic I don't rate particularly highly, and Murray's US Open loss was the worst of his four Slam performances.
We have different ways of rating players I guess- you give a much greater weighting to Masters tournaments and such, I tend to look at performances in Slam events because those are the ones that I think separate the top players from the nearly-men. When Murray's come through a year which started with him being made favourite for the Aussie Open and gone out in all four tournaments to players ranked 6th, 8th, 11th and 14th, I really start to wonder about his ability to step up on the big stage.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Verdasco was on a run, and he played a Murray who had the flu. Murray still took him to 5 sets. I don't see how he would have beaten anyone. He got PULVERISED in 2 of those sets.
That match was also 10 months ago, believe me Verdasco isn't playing tennis like that anymore (though I understand your point is regarding Verdasco at his best). Either way, a better match to point at Verdasco playing supreme tennis was against Nadal and Stepanek.
Baghdatis took out Roddick and Nalbandian in the 2006 Australian Open, Gonzalez took out Hewitt and Nadal, Tsonga took out Nadal.
It happens, top players lose to players on a run at the Aust Open, because its at the start of the season and many players arent' playing the tennis they are playing come June/July.
That's a bit unfair. No where have I ever weighted Mastes higher than Slams. I find Djokovic and Murray's seasons to be a huge letdown just as much as you do. And I do agree that Murray hasn't stepped up to the big stage, I've never denied that. At the start of the year he was playing better tennis than Roger, that was a fact.
Anyway, I think you're underestimating how hard it is to win a Slam though. The only real Grand Slam loss of his that was really bad was Cilic at the US Open.
Gonzalez should have been favourite against Murray at the French (I loaded up on Gonzo at $2.2) and losing to Roddick in the semi-final of Wimbledon wasn't such a loss. Everyone knows Roddick is the better grass player... its a faster court!
And the Verdasco match we've spoken about at length.
I believe you've judged Murray off 4 matches, one of which he had the flu, the other he was up against a better player on clay (Gonzo), one of which he lost to a player better on grass (Roddick), and a shock loss to Cilic which signalled choke. Doesn't mean he doesn't have the game to beat players with firepower.
Last edited: