Andy Murray The Greatest and General Tennis Chat

[GordonS]

Hmm. Even across those wins against Nishioka and Zverev he didn't play a lot of great shots. He got through them with better tennis intelligence and a ton of grit. Against two players who hit the ball hard he looked a long way off the pace. Sure, he's not match sharp but at this stage how many players are?

I worry that he's lost a lot of power as well as pace, but the pundits seem happy with his progress and WTF do I know. 

[GordonS]

4 hours ago, Donathan said:

Wild inconsistency is not just limited to Konta in the women’s game tbf. Apart from Serena Williams, none of the so called top players seem to be able to put together a consistent run of slam QFs and SFs. Feels like every slam, at least 5-6 of the top 10 seeds are punted out in the first two rounds.

I hear that said a lot so I thought I'd look at the last 10 slams. I looked at the seedings of players in the finals , women listed first, and the first number in each match is the winner. I also looked at how many of the top 10 seeds made it to the last 16 (this is in brackets)

Aus 20: 14 v unseeded (4), men 2 v 5 (7)

US 19: 15 v 8 (6), men 2 v 5 (5)

Wim 19: 7 v 11 (5), men 1 v 2 (4)

RG 19: 8 v unseeded (3), men 2 v 4 (10)

Aus 19: 4 v 8 (7), men 1 v 2 (6)

US 18: 17 v 20 (3), men 6 v 3 (8)

Wim 18: 11 v 25 (1) , men 8 v 12 (5)

RG 18: 1 v 10 (5), men 1 v 7 (8)

Aus 18: 1 v 2 (5), men 2 v 6 (6)

US 17: unseeded v 15 (4), men 1 v 28 (4)

 

So on average 5.7 of the top 10 women don't make it to the second week, and 3.7 men in the top 10 don't make it to the second week. That's a pretty big difference. The women have had 3 unseeded finalists and 11 finalists from outside the top 10; the lowest seeded man to make a final was 28th and he was one of only two finalists from outside the top 8. Incidentally, both of those finalist from outside the top 8 are actually the same guy - Kevin Anderson.

If you go further back the men's side is even more consistent, because you're into the peak era of the Big Four.

Still can't sleep...

 

[John Lambies Doos]

I hear that said a lot so I thought I'd look at the last 10 slams. I looked at the seedings of players in the finals , women listed first, and the first number in each match is the winner. I also looked at how many of the top 10 seeds made it to the last 16 (this is in brackets)
Aus 20: 14 v unseeded (4), men 2 v 5 (7)
US 19: 15 v 8 (6), men 2 v 5 (5)
Wim 19: 7 v 11 (5), men 1 v 2 (4)
RG 19: 8 v unseeded (3), men 2 v 4 (10)
Aus 19: 4 v 8 (7), men 1 v 2 (6)
US 18: 17 v 20 (3), men 6 v 3 (
Wim 18: 11 v 25 (1) , men 8 v 12 (5)
RG 18: 1 v 10 (5), men 1 v 7 (
Aus 18: 1 v 2 (5), men 2 v 6 (6)
US 17: unseeded v 15 (4), men 1 v 28 (4)
 
So on average 5.7 of the top 10 women don't make it to the second week, and 3.7 men in the top 10 don't make it to the second week. That's a pretty big difference. The women have had 3 unseeded finalists and 11 finalists from outside the top 10; the lowest seeded man to make a final was 28th and he was one of only two finalists from outside the top 8. Incidentally, both of those finalist from outside the top 8 are actually the same guy - Kevin Anderson.
If you go further back the men's side is even more consistent, because you're into the peak era of the Big Four.
Still can't sleep...
 

Good stats, however in slams it's best of 3 for woman and best of 5 for men. That's a pretty significant variable that will undoubtedly skew the variation between gender

[true_rover]

Good stats, however in slams it's best of 3 for woman and best of 5 for men. That's a pretty significant variable that will undoubtedly skew the variation between gender

In fairness, it's also skewed by the difference in depth between men's and women's tennis.

Going into this tournament, you'd be lucky to make a case for any more than 3 or 4 men to win it, whilst there are about 15-20 women that are capable of winning a Slam.

[Lex]

Murray’s the greatest British sportsman of all time, but his time at the top is over.

Injuries and age have caught up with him and he won’t be troubling the latter stages of a grand slam again. The new generation has finally arrived.

Question for Andy now is does he want to be a jobbing top 100 tour player for a few years or does he want to retire.

Seen doubles mentioned earlier, that may be a solution. Him and his brother would certainly get the crowd out at Wimbledon - COVID permitting.

I think there’s a lot to be said for a clean and straight retirement though. Can’t help but think he may be doing long term damage to his body ploughing on the way he is. He has nothing left to prove and causing himself long term issues just isn’t worth carrying on.

[Donathan]

Murray’s the greatest British sportsman of all time, but his time at the top is over.

Injuries and age have caught up with him and he won’t be troubling the latter stages of a grand slam again. The new generation has finally arrived.

Question for Andy now is does he want to be a jobbing top 100 tour player for a few years or does he want to retire.

Seen doubles mentioned earlier, that may be a solution. Him and his brother would certainly get the crowd out at Wimbledon - COVID permitting.

I think there’s a lot to be said for a clean and straight retirement though. Can’t help but think he may be doing long term damage to his body ploughing on the way he is. He has nothing left to prove and causing himself long term issues just isn’t worth carrying on.

I reckon singles should be out the question, no point being a top 100 jobber imo. If I were in his shoes I’d form a full time doubles partnership with Jamie (assuming Jamie wants to, of course. Sorry Neal Skupski) and then maybe just play singles at the slams and Davis Cup with no real expectations of even getting to the second week.

The Murray brothers could dominate the world in doubles IMO.

[Loki]

Felix had a serving masterclass last night, and with Andy's rather brittle service games, he could never get the pressure on Felix to really test him.  

If Murray had a serve like Felix, Murray would have more slams than Novak.  Its a great weapon and he was composed through out.

I wouldnt write Andy Murray's obituary yet, his error rate will come down with more games.  He needs to fix his serve though.  He should be looking at getting a different coach to help with that.

Potential Felix Vs Thiem in the last 16 which could be an absolute belter of a match.

[The-coo-shed]

Ah yes. The ' he just should retire' chat when he loses. People were saying that when started playing challengers after his hip operation and lost to players raked in the top 200. He then went on to win Antwerp, beating Wawrinka in the final.  He obviously just wants to play because he loves the sport. Nothing wrong that.

I don't expect him to win a Grand Slam or even get that deep in one. Just appreciate the fact he is back and competing again. You get moments like that match against Nishioka. 

 

[GordonS]

5 hours ago, John Lambies Doos said:

8 hours ago, GordonS said:

I hear that said a lot so I thought I'd look at the last 10 slams. I looked at the seedings of players in the finals , women listed first, and the first number in each match is the winner. I also looked at how many of the top 10 seeds made it to the last 16 (this is in brackets)
Aus 20: 14 v unseeded (4), men 2 v 5 (7)
US 19: 15 v 8 (6), men 2 v 5 (5)
Wim 19: 7 v 11 (5), men 1 v 2 (4)
RG 19: 8 v unseeded (3), men 2 v 4 (10)
Aus 19: 4 v 8 (7), men 1 v 2 (6)
US 18: 17 v 20 (3), men 6 v 3 (
Wim 18: 11 v 25 (1) , men 8 v 12 (5)
RG 18: 1 v 10 (5), men 1 v 7 (
Aus 18: 1 v 2 (5), men 2 v 6 (6)
US 17: unseeded v 15 (4), men 1 v 28 (4)
 
So on average 5.7 of the top 10 women don't make it to the second week, and 3.7 men in the top 10 don't make it to the second week. That's a pretty big difference. The women have had 3 unseeded finalists and 11 finalists from outside the top 10; the lowest seeded man to make a final was 28th and he was one of only two finalists from outside the top 8. Incidentally, both of those finalist from outside the top 8 are actually the same guy - Kevin Anderson.
If you go further back the men's side is even more consistent, because you're into the peak era of the Big Four.
Still can't sleep...
 

Good stats, however in slams it's best of 3 for woman and best of 5 for men. That's a pretty significant variable that will undoubtedly skew the variation between gender

Good point, I suppose a better player is more likely to come through in 5 sets than 3. If I was sad enough - and I am - I could check Masters events, but even then players approach them differently from slams. 

[John Lambies Doos]

Murray won't be retiring, injury permitting, until at least Wimbledon next year.

[peasy23]

Felix had a serving masterclass last night, and with Andy's rather brittle service games, he could never get the pressure on Felix to really test him.  
If Murray had a serve like Felix, Murray would have more slams than Novak.  Its a great weapon and he was composed through out.
I wouldnt write Andy Murray's obituary yet, his error rate will come down with more games.  He needs to fix his serve though.  He should be looking at getting a different coach to help with that.
Potential Felix Vs Thiem in the last 16 which could be an absolute belter of a match.

It's a self repeating cycle though, can't get sharp enough to win matches, because he can't win enough matches to stay in tourneys long enough. His seeding going forward won't help either, he's going to be getting tough draws from very early on.

FAA played very well from the bits I saw, while Andy looked to be underpowered right from the start, you have to think that Tuesday's 5 setter took a lot out of him, it certainly looked that way.

[peasy23]

Dreadful by Konta, she's an absolute bottle merchant. She even had 0-40 on her opponents penultimate game... And blew it...

Huge opportunity missed for her. Her section of the draw was wide open.

[Loki]

Yeah absolutely, but he's in the fortunate position of being able to get wild cards for direct entry. 

I think he does need to adapt and look to shorten points, but that starts out with the strength of his serve. 

A full pre season behind him and I think we can get to see a return to form.  I'd still fancy his chances on grass.

[Loki]

As for Konta I don't think she's a bottle merchant.  She just can't adapt her style to counter act opponents.  Her Plan A tennis is really good, but doesn't really have a Plan B.  She is a top 50 player that can play top 10 tennis because she is very effective at what she does well.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Loki

[John Lambies Doos]

As for Konta I don't think she's a bottle merchant.  She just can't adapt her style to counter act opponents.  Her Plan A tennis is really good, but doesn't really have a Plan B.  She is a top 50 player that can play top 10 tennis because she is very effective at what she does well.

Not sure Loki, she threw a couple of Fantastic opportunities to reach slam finals by choking from promising positions. People called Murray a bottler but he wasnt because he was losing his slam finals against better players, however Konta is losing her opportunities against lesser players. Jury is out but imo, a choking gene may exist.

[Silvio Tattiescone]

Apropos of nothing

 

[GordonS]

14 hours ago, NewBornBairn said:

Apropos of nothing

 

Thanks for that.

Features a few of his definitive shots - the hooked forehand down the line on the run is a specialty, and he's got to be one of the best lobbers ever. Who was the lank mutant he just kept lobbing at Wimbledon one year? He was like "I don't care if you're 9 feet tall, I'm going to draw you to the net just for the fun of going over you." And the lob to win the Davis Cup while the home fans were celebrating what looked like a certain point for Goffin was pure Murray.

If he never achieves anything again he's left us with buckets of great memories.

[Donathan]

Evans and Norrie punted as well. No British involvement in singles in the second week

[TheScarf]

Was having a wee think there about who's the greatest male player ever to not win a Slam?  Statistics would dictate Marcelo Rios as he was World Number 1 despite never winning one.  

But I'm going for Dave Nalbandian.  The way he hit the ball was superb.  It looked great, it sounded great, and his net play and touch was immense.

[GordonS]

1 hour ago, TheScarf said:

Was having a wee think there about who's the greatest male player ever to not win a Slam?  Statistics would dictate Marcelo Rios as he was World Number 1 despite never winning one.  

But I'm going for Dave Nalbandian.  The way he hit the ball was superb.  It looked great, it sounded great, and his net play and touch was immense.

Most talented I've seen that didn't win a slam is Mecir. He won the tour finals and the Olympics among 11 major titles and had fantastic hands. But maybe the most unlucky is David Ferrer, who in another era would surely have had at least one French Open.