Andy Murray Latest and General Tennis Chat

[Nightmare]

Missed a goldmine on that one.

I actually did consider jumping in a few times, but on each occasion decided not to. I originally didn't think Djokovic was worth a lay at 1.2, and then when it fell to whatever it was after the first set, I thought Murray's questionable mental strength would just result in more of the same, so never bothered with that either.

Murray is so unpredictable that I tend to avoid him anyway, though. Plus I hate backing against someone I want to win. Makes me feel dirty when I realise my money is more important than supporting them.

[blue4578]

1.28 was too short when it just about to go one set all. Djokovic has been suffering from an allergy, hay fever I assume, and also looked very tired at times against Wawrinka. He looked pretty weary at the end of the second set. Djokovic is far superior to Murray of course, and particularly at the moment and on clay, but Murray looked to have a fair shot to me. My problem is that I don't particularly like "trading" on tennis, by which I mean betting every point or every few points and constantly changing my position. Requires too much concentration and I've not been particularly good at it in the past. So these days if I am getting involved in-running, I tend to make the bet and stick to that position. If the original bet is value, which it was on this occasion it's pretty safe to say, you should end up in front overall. Murray's weak serve meant I should've taken the money and ran when he was about to serve for it. It's never as easy as that though as you have about 30 seconds to make your mind up.

Anyway enough about betting. Looking forward to the final tomorrow and the French Open draw in a few days. For once, it's not clear cut whether Murray would want to be in the Nadal half of the draw or not with how Djokovic is playing. I think all of the top players are glad that del Potro (if he is fit) has got himself into the top 32 to avoid the possibility of a blockbuster first round match.

[Savage Henry]

Indeed it was. Djokovic from 1.2 starting price went to 1.04/1.05 when he got ahead in the second set. About 1.33 at the start of final set. Murray was 1.11 serving for it 30-15 up. Murray went to about 1.4 when Djokovic was 0-30 at 5-5. I wasn't looking right at the end but the matched total was certainly over £30m near the end of the final set.

I am foolish as I'd layed Djokovic at 1.28 and if I had any sense I'd have layed the 1.25 on Murray as he was about to serve for it and been celebrating a very pleasing profit at the end no matter who won. Net cord changed everything though, I'm 99% sure Murray would've won but for that, and it was the luckiest net cord I've ever seen. It's always better to be lucky than good, and unfortunately for Murray Djokovic is very good as well as being very lucky.

That match just reinforced my belief that Murray will always keep falling short when it matters. He can talk positively and talk a good game, but when it comes down to it, he just hasn't got it in him to get over the line when it matters against the top players. He can beat the players outside the top 10 with his eyes closed, but he's never going to win a grand slam unless it gets handed to him by all the top players getting knocked out.

The Djokovic and Murray career paths are very similar in a lot of ways, but clearly Djorkovic has taken his game on another level while Murray seems to have reached his plateau. Truth is, there are the big three, then a massive gap, then Murray, then another massive gap, then the rest.

[TheScarf]

The Djokovic and Murray career paths are very similar in a lot of ways, but clearly Djorkovic has taken his game on another level while Murray seems to have reached his plateau. Truth is, there are the big three, then a massive gap, then Murray, then another massive gap, then the rest.

That's the way I've always seen it. Murray just lacks that special something that you need to join them. He's is in the second tier of men's tennis by himself. The likes of Soderling, Ferrer and Berdych lack the all round game needed to reach that tier.

[Loki]

Djokovic has that slight edge on Murray still. Djokovic was mentally toying with him in the closing stages of that final set. I thought that Djokovic was over emphasising his tiredness and how hurt he was everytime he won a long point. Just to show Murray that I am tired and still beating you. Murray is mentally weak, and until he addresses that he will again show that he just isn't quite there.

I think he has definitely proved that his game is almost there. The two matches in particular I think he has bottled, was last night's match and the match against Nadal in the O2 championships. The fine lines between winning and losing in these two matches in particular were incredibly fine indeed. Will a new coach give him this inner belief? I doubt it. He will just need to break through it himself, if he is to achieve a Slam. I still think he can do it, his game is there for sure. Does he believe it though? I don't think he does.

[McKee]

The Djokovic and Murray career paths are very similar in a lot of ways, but clearly Djorkovic has taken his game on another level while Murray seems to have reached his plateau. Truth is, there are the big three, then a massive gap, then Murray, then another massive gap, then the rest.

How can you put Federer up there with Nadal and Djokovic? What have you seen in the last however many months to suggest something like that?

[Loki]

How can you put Federer up there with Nadal and Djokovic? What have you seen in the last however many months to suggest something like that?

The fact that he has a lot of bottle and on his day could still destroy either of the top two. Although his power is on the wane, he is still more likely to win a grand slam than Murray is. Although a fully fit Del Potro could be there with Murray. In that second tier.

[McKee]

The fact that he has a lot of bottle and on his day could still destroy either of the top two. Although his power is on the wane, he is still more likely to win a grand slam than Murray is. Although a fully fit Del Potro could be there with Murray. In that second tier.

Has he though? He's beaten, what is it, 1 top 10 player in grandslam matches since winning the Australian Open, as well as beating only about 7 in the last 14 masters events. I don't think he could destroy either of them, certainly not on Djokovic's recent form anyway. He has two wins in the last 8 matches against both of them, and is by quite along way behind them in the French Open odds, and not too far ahead of Murray. He is certainly more likely to one than Murray, however that's hardly a ringing ednorsement, given his career of ever continuing almosts.

[Loki]

Get Federer on the grass or hard courts and you'll see that he still has the ability to beat both Djokovic and Nadal. His powers are certainly on the wane, and his physical conditioning isn't anywhere near the other members of the top four, hence why I believe he has struggled recently. I think he will continually struggle in Masters events now that he is out of the top two and will be drawn to meet Nadal or Djokovic in the semi finals of these events.

Also past form and statistics is a good way of analysing what has happened previous, however it still can't predict future form. This time last year it was widely acknowledged that Djokovic had to seriously improve aspects of his games to resurrect his game. That same analysis done on his previous play wouldn't have predicted his astounding run of victories since the tail end of last year.

Federer will not win the French Open. But i wouldn't discount him in either of the other two Slams to come this season. He will always have the game to beat anyone.

I think it would be interesting for Murray to be drawn in Djokovic's half of the draw for the French Open.

[blue4578]

I disagree with a lot of that Loki.

Federer might have a shot against Djokovic or Nadal at Wimbledon, that's for sure. However at the US Open he will struggle unless things change between now and then. I honestly don't believe Federer's level is that much lower than 2005/2006 right now. He has probably dropped off a fraction, but in 2011 he is up against two opponents way better than anything he faced during his dominant years. In all the hard court tournaments, he hasn't lost to anyone not named Nadal or Djokovic. Let's also not forget that Federer beat both Nadal and Djokovic on a fast, indoor hard court at the ATP World Tour Finals in London just six months ago. He also beat Djokovic in Basle and Shanghai just before that. Federer's physical conditioning is fine, his movement around the court is almost as good as it's ever been. From personal knowledge you naturally do slow down a little as you approach 30 though. Federer's forehand is more erratic and he is losing belief this year against the top two. That said, he could've even beaten Nadal in Madrid if he'd played the big points well, he had a lot of break point chances. He hasn't been crushed against Djokovic either. The only match he has been crushed was in the semis in Miami against Nadal, which was as one-sided as the 2008 French Open Final.

Djokovic has made three major improvements. The Davis Cup win gave him a great deal of confidence and belief. The gluten free diet has by all accounts sorted out many of his physical problems. This much has been obvious as he has played so many matches and played superbly most of the time. Many people though that the three hour Murray semi final in Rome would've given him no chance against Nadal (he was 9/4 to win; thank you very much odds makers), yet he came back and won in straight sets; his third tournament win in three weeks, very tough to do on clay. Finally he has got his serve back to the level it was in 2007 or 2008. It had dropped off for some reason in the past couple of years. I suppose it may be a confidence thing since everything else is working so well.

Agree that Federer has virtually no chance at Roland Garros. The likes of Ferrer, Soderling, Berdych and one or two others have a fair chance against him before he even gets to a semi final against Nadal or Djokovic. [Murray can't be in Federer's half of the draw.] Federer will be hoping for a kind draw.

Let's not forget, Murray served for the match against Djokovic, and was 1/9 to win at one point and would've won for sure IMO but for a lucky net cord. No one else has come anywhere near as close to beating Djokovic this year, and this on Murray's worse surface. It would be the surface he'd least like to play Djokovic on for sure. Coming into this year Murray had also beaten Djokovic three straight times, all in Masters 1000 finals. [Djokovic has won all the other six meetings, two this year and four 2006-2008.] Yet the key thing here is that I think that Djokovic's fundamental tennis skills are better than Murray's. Djokovic at 100%, mentally and physically, would nearly always beat Murray at 100% for me. He lost his way for a couple of years but has found it again.

This is the big, big problem that Nadal currently faces. On faster courts, he had problems early in his career with big hitters over powering him, such as Blake, Youzhny and Berdych. He has managed to improve his serve and hit flatter shots to overcome these players most of the time now on the faster courts. Yet suddenly Nadal is faced with someone who can hit big, powerful flat shots, serve well, move superbly and do it all consistently well on a clay court. It's just like with Federer in 2005-2008 on clay against Nadal. Federer's best would always beat Nadal's best, and he could win 6-1 and 6-2 sets against Nadal, even a 6-0 in Hamburg one year. Yet he could never usually keep it up for a match, so Nadal's consistency tended to win out. Djokovic at the moment has the beating of Nadal on every surface (grass yet to be proven) as he can maintain an excellent level of performance for the whole match at the moment. Federer even during his best years was always a bit inconsistent against the top players, but now is even more so and faces a much tougher level of competition. At the moment, Djokovic's best level is better than Nadal's on all surfaces. Can he keep it up? I think Djokovic should be favourite for Roland Garros, although he isn't. I think I feel a bet coming on.

[Nightmare]

RG draw done. Murray plays a TBD qualifier in the 1st round, and then will play the winner of TDB qualifier v TDB qualifier in the 2nd.

(Probable) route if he were to go all the way:

Qualifer > Qualifier > Raonic > Troicki > Melzer > Nadal > Djokovic

One of the most generous draws Ive ever seen at a Grand Slam. If only he could have got this draw at Wimbledon or the US Open.

Early round matches of interest:

1st round - Nadal v Isner (Nadal will still hammer him, but quite a big name to get in the 1st)

1st round - Federer v Lopez (could be interesting actually, Feliciano has been playing well)

3rd round - Djokovic v Del Potro (early test for Novak, unless JMDP decides to injure himself as usual)

[McKee]

A good draw for Murray there. Raonic has been up and down on clay, but he's an unknown entity for Murray, and he does not adapt very well to unknown entities. Vey lucky to have drawn Troicki instead of Verdasco, Almagro or Wawrinka, although Almagro will most likely beat Melzer, so he'll play him anyway.

Looking like another cakewalk draw for Djokovic.

[Nightmare]

Looking at the draw, I can actually see Dolgopolov instead of Troicki in the 4th. Still not as tough as it could have been, though.

Djokovic plays JMDP and Gasquet in the 3rd and 4th, which whilst he should win, are potential upsets. Wouldn't surprise me to see Gasquet take a lead in the match before choking, as he always seems to do. And if JMDP is fully fit, you never know with him.

Federer gets his customary bend-over job from Wawrinka in the 4th. Might as well just give him a bye to the QFs if he wins his 3rd round match.

[McKee]

Yep, likewise Nadal and Verdasco.

[Nightmare]

Nadal losing 2-1 in sets to John Isner in the 1st round. Maybe the biggest upset of all time?

Could help Murray down the road as well...

Still fully expect Nadal to get it done, but this would be amazing.

[blue4578]

I'm not so sure, see my post in the Gambling Forum. I certainly hope not anyway! Wish me luck.

[#Gary]

Really thought Isner could've taken that final set to another tie break!

[blue4578]

No tie break in the final set.

Isner played the set pretty well, the difference was Nadal nailing three brilliant returns in succession. Other than that Isner pushed Nadal pretty hard. Good match, shame that Isner couldn't get to 4-4 or 5-5 in the final set to see if Nadal would really feel the pressure.

[#Gary]

No tie break in the final set.

Isner played the set pretty well, the difference was Nadal nailing three brilliant returns in succession. Other than that Isner pushed Nadal pretty hard. Good match, shame that Isner couldn't get to 4-4 or 5-5 in the final set to see if Nadal would really feel the pressure.

My mistake. I always confuse it as being the French as the one with tiebreaks in the final set.

What you've said is pretty much what I meant, I really did think he was going to get break point but it wasn't to be. He looked fcked.

Edited May 24, 2011 by garymcc1874

[McKee]

Fantastic match developing between Tsonga and Andreev. Get it watched. Can see it going 5 if Andreev can take this one.