Australian Open Final: Murray v Federer- Official Thread Watch

Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#141
Report 8 years ago
#141
(Original post by notnek)
I've finally worked out your reasoning.

You believe how good a tennis player is should be completely judged on the grand slams (the only tournaments you watch?). Why don't they just get rid of all the other tournaments? What's the point in playing them if they're not important.
Did I ever in my posts say that masters are irelevant? Where?! I watch every single bit of tennis when I can and yes I do watch masters and yes it does provide some of the greatest tennis ever (Djoko/Nadal anyone?) but when in 20-30 years everyone will open up record books they will be judged on Grand Slama, not masters (Unless they break records for record masters win without GS (Which I doubt murray will even come close to)). And also ask any player they will say masters are good for GS warm-up. Sad yes i know but in the players' eyes GS is where its at.
0
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#142
Report 8 years ago
#142
Also Murray is such a hard court player. Give him clay and WOW! He is so crap. No wonder the French Open gets hype because everyone know before the tournament Murray will be out of it and will be lucky to reach final 16/8. To be a great player and top 3 you need to play games at any type of court which sadly murray doesn't excel at.
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#143
Report 8 years ago
#143
(Original post by Ultimate1)
Also Murray is such a hard court player. Give him clay and WOW! He is so crap. No wonder the French Open gets hype because everyone know before the tournament Murray will be out of it and will be lucky to reach final 16/8. To be a great player and top 3 you need to play games at any type of court which sadly murray doesn't excel at.
Convenient that you fail to mention Del Potro's never made it past the 2nd round of Wimbledon. Murray got to the QFs of the French last year.
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#144
Report 8 years ago
#144
(Original post by Kreuzuerk)
Convenient that you fail to mention Del Potro's never made it past the 2nd round of Wimbledon. Murray got to the QFs of the French last year.
And how many times has Del Potro competed at Wimbledon?
0
quote
reply
Notnek
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#145
Report 8 years ago
#145
(Original post by Ultimate1)
Did I ever in my posts say that masters are irelevant? Where?! I watch every single bit of tennis when I can and yes I do watch masters and yes it does provide some of the greatest tennis ever (Djoko/Nadal anyone?) but when in 20-30 years everyone will open up record books they will be judged on Grand Slama, not masters (Unless they break records for record masters win without GS (Which I doubt murray will even come close to)). And also ask any player they will say masters are good for GS warm-up. Sad yes i know but in the players' eyes GS is where its at.
This should not be about what 'they' believe it should be about what you believe. You watch Masters tournaments so you must have seen Murray winning at least one out of the four that he has one. You may or may not have seen him play brilliantly against Djokovic on two final occasions and come from behind against Del Potro to win in Canada.

Did you see any of that? Were you impressed? Isn't Murray a great player? Why am I asking so many questions?
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#146
Report 8 years ago
#146
(Original post by Ultimate1)
And how many times has Del Potro competed at Wimbledon?
Three times. Which is exactly the same as the no. of times Murray's been at the French.

Way to prove your point there. When you make self-defeating arguments, you come across as a bit of a joke.
quote
reply
Notnek
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#147
Report 8 years ago
#147
(Original post by Ultimate1)
Also Murray is such a hard court player. Give him clay and WOW! He is so crap. No wonder the French Open gets hype because everyone know before the tournament Murray will be out of it and will be lucky to reach final 16/8. To be a great player and top 3 you need to play games at any type of court which sadly murray doesn't excel at.
What about Sampras? He never won the French and only reached the semis on one occasion. Did you rate him?
0
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#148
Report 8 years ago
#148
(Original post by Kreuzuerk)
Three times. Which is exactly the same as the no. of times Murray's been at the French.

Way to prove your point there.
What I'm trying to say is that we can clearly see that Murray can't play for carp on clay however I've never really got to see Potro's talent on grass. Also Potro is still younger than Murray so give it some time (like many murray fans are also quick to point out).
0
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#149
Report 8 years ago
#149
(Original post by notnek)
What about Sampras? He never won the French and only reached the semis on one occasion. Did you rate him?
But he had the record in other slams to back it up? If Murray can't even win a slam on his favourite court which happen the most in the season (Twice!) then where are his slams gonna come from? Clay? Lol.
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#150
Report 8 years ago
#150
(Original post by Ultimate1)
What I'm trying to say is that we can clearly see that Murray can't play for carp on clay however I've never really got to see Potro's talent on grass. Also Potro is still younger than Murray so give it some time (like many murray fans are also quick to point out).
You can't base an argument on your failing to regularly watch, arguably, the biggest GS of the year. That's just plain nonsense. Del Potro has competed in Wimbledon three times, that's more than enough time to asses his ability on grass.
quote
reply
Notnek
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#151
Report 8 years ago
#151
(Original post by Ultimate1)
But he had the record in other slams to back it up? If Murray can't even win a slam on his favourite court which happen the most in the season (Twice!) then where are his slams gonna come from? Clay? Lol.
This is getting complicated. In your eyes, to be a great player you need to either win a grand slam (and don't say it's not all about winning because you said it was) on all surfaces or win on multiple occasions on two out of the three surfaces or break the MS events record.

I can count the players that have done this on one hand and clearly Murray is not one of them. He must then be in the league behind them which is still very impressive no? Final question: do you seriously think that Murray should not be in the top ten or was that just a comment that you made without thinking?
0
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#152
Report 8 years ago
#152
(Original post by Kreuzuerk)
You can't base an argument on your failing to regularly watch, arguably, the biggest GS of the year. That's just plain nonsense. Del Potro has competed in Wimbledon three times, that's more than enough time to asses his ability on grass.
What do you mean? I follow tennis all year round and keep upto date with it. Yes I've seen Del Potro play on grass and yes he isn't very good on grass but seeing the way he played I think definately should be getting upto last 16/8, whereas Murray is a complete disastor on clay and seriously needs to improve on that as well as grass (However much can't be said and I'll give him credit here, he has worked hard on his grass game!).
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#153
Report 8 years ago
#153
Something else which is interesting to note is that it took Federer roughly five attempts at each slam to win it, forgetting the French of course. Murray's only just entering this zone now.
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#154
Report 8 years ago
#154
(Original post by Ultimate1)
What do you mean? I follow tennis all year round and keep upto date with it. Yes I've seen Del Potro play on grass and yes he isn't very good on grass but seeing the way he played I think definitely should be getting upto last 16/8, whereas Murray is a complete disastor on clay and seriously needs to improve on that as well as grass (However much can't be said and I'll give him credit here, he has worked hard on his grass game!).
The facts show the Del Potro has been knocked out at the 2nd round each year, whereas Murray is steadily improving on clay, reaching the QF last year. Moreover, I would also not want to suggest that you look foolish but Murray reached the SF of Wimbledon last year. So, your call for 'serious improvement' on grass looks a little churlish.
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#155
Report 8 years ago
#155
(Original post by notnek)
This is getting complicated. In your eyes, to be a great player you need to either win a grand slam (and don't say it's not all about winning because you said it was) on all surfaces or win on multiple occasions on two out of the three surfaces or break the MS events record.

I can count the players that have done this on one hand and clearly Murray is not one of them. He must then be in the league behind them which is still very impressive no? Final question: do you seriously think that Murray should not be in the top ten or was that just a comment that you made without thinking?
Seeing a how any tennis player that can mount a decent ammount of wins can get into the top 10 then on thtat basis yes. But TBH if there was more competition murray would always be hovering around 20th.
0
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#156
Report 8 years ago
#156
(Original post by Kreuzuerk)
The facts show the Del Potro has been knocked out at the 2nd round each year, whereas Murray is steadily improving on clay, reaching the QF last year.
and who did he loose to? Gonzalez a player in his decline still dished out a thumping to Murray. :cool:
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#157
Report 8 years ago
#157
(Original post by Ultimate1)
and who did he loose to? Gonzalez a player in his decline still dished out a thumping to Murray. :cool:
What the hell are you talking about? It went to four sets, so that's hardly a trashing and moreover Gonzalez is hardly a player in decline considering he reached the semi-final of a major slam and is currently ranked 11 in the world. You do know how to make yourself look silly.
quote
reply
Ultimate1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#158
Report 8 years ago
#158
(Original post by Kreuzuerk)
What the hell are you talking about? It went to four sets, so that's hardly a trashing and moreover Gonzalez is hardly a player in decline considering he reached the semi-final of a major slam and is currently ranked 11 in the world. You do know how to make yourself look silly.
So tell me once he has ever been a threat to a major player in either masters or GS. And if memory serves me correctly (I'm not 100% sure) wasn't Gonzalez back from injury just a few months prior to the French Open?
0
quote
reply
Notnek
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#159
Report 8 years ago
#159
(Original post by Ultimate1)
Seeing a how any tennis player that can mount a decent ammount of wins can get into the top 10 then on thtat basis yes. But TBH if there was more competition murray would always be hovering around 20th.
Any player can do it if they're good enough but there are only 10 that have at the moment so they must be judged to be the best ten.

And that second comment was stupid. If there was more competition then Federer could be outside the top 100.
0
quote
reply
GibbseyT
Badges: 0
#160
Report 8 years ago
#160
Im Gutted. I was quite hopeful he might win his first grandslam. Maybe next time eh?
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you like exams?

Yes (135)
18.6%
No (440)
60.61%
Not really bothered about them (151)
20.8%

Watched Threads

View All