Australian Open 2015

[ICEMAN_9588]

Yes, it was the first Grand Slam final after the surgery. And that was a great effort.

But the match was the same as the other Grand Slam finals played by Andy since 2010 (I don't count US Open 2008, he was too young and too tired against Roger).
You are 2-0 in the 3rd set, your opponent is roaming around the court...you have won the 2nd set, you are "on fire" in that moment.

Maybe Murray would have lost the match anyway, but there is a difference between trying to take an advantage and winning just 1 game out of the last 13...

I mean, Andy had a mental collapse, not physical.

[Vieira151]

Yes. But maybe the fact it was his first since the surgery had an affect on his mentality during the match. If he melts down in his next? Then we can assume it's just him.


It probably is, especially since there is no Lendl, but I want to believe.

[ICEMAN_9588]

Ok, maybe it was the back surgery this time.
What was it in the other 4 times (2010, 11, 12 in Wimbledon, 13)?

[Vieira151]

The first two were down to a mixture of a) Britishness ( ) and b) a different mentality than more recent finals - he played conservatively and was eaten up by the better players. I would count 08 as well in this bracket. However, it should be noted he played Djokovic in 2011 - Djokovic's breakthrough year, where he practically set an impossible standard of play in the first half of the year.

In Wimbledon 12, he was playing and competing well before Federer decided to play fantastically, under the roof (indoor and no wind, where his precision techniques thrive, especially in his old age where he cannot move as well as he use to). I would say Wimbledon 12 was the first time Murray played to win a Grandslam, as opposed to merely take part. It was noticeable, for he then won the Olympics and the US Open in that year.

In 13, he came up against a formidable Djokovic. They had a close 4 set match and in the end he was outplayed - there was nothing much really behind this loss. No real mental collapse, if I remember correctly. It was a solid match of tennis. Looking at the highlights, Djokovic seemed to go up a gear in the 4th set and Murray could no longer compete physically (it certainly did not seem mental, at least from the highlights). It was still a typical Djokovic - Murray match; filled with gruelling, intense and tactical rallies. But kind of boring, as always.

I think it was said that Murray was playing with back pain for the majority of the 13 season, which I think makes his Wimbledon title look a mixture of a) gutsy and b) handed to him. I'm debating as to which it was. The Wimbledon final went to 5 sets, and Murray was still able to compete physically, which I think says something about the courts at the Australian Open (that they are much slower and play much more physically because of this).

[ICEMAN_9588]

These are all honourable argument, and I can agree with most of them.
But in may he will be 28, so for me these are all excuses.

Murray is a great player, no doubt about it.
He's not a great Champion, and there are not doubts about it as well.

A great Champion can raise his level when the game is getting harder. That's how you overcome a formidable Djoovic, or Federer who "decides" to play fantastically, or the rain, or the roof, or the back pain (and I'm not talking about the surgery, I'm talking about everytime Andy start touching his back, or his leg, after an important point lost, or when the match is running away from his hands), or whatever.

You're talking about how good his opponents have been during the finals.
It's true, but I could analize the situation on the other hand.

Spoiler: show

Australian Open 2010: Federer played two amazing sets, but in the 3rd, Murray was up 5-3. And he had more than one set point in the tie break...
Australian Open 2013: first two set were a great fight, but Djokovic needed one break, and Murray was gone (and he had chances to win a break in the 2nd set).
Wimbledon 2012: Murray had break points on 2-2 and on 4-4 in the second set. Then Federer played two unreal volleys to level the score on 7-5, but right after, Murray was still in the match.
Australian Open 2015: well, this is too easy and we already talk about that....

Ok, he had good moments too. In US Open 2012 he was able to stop Djokovic comeback and win in the 5th.
But we're talking about 6 finals lost...

[Vieira151]

On the phone, but my point about Federer raising his level, well, that's more to do with him being the best indoor player. He was, and is, that good I still expect him to beat the top players, including Nadal, when it comes to indoor.

So what I'm saying I never gave Murray a chance once it became indoors. He was better when it was open roof, and there was wind and other environmental factors. Once it was closed, I knew he would lose.

Ps he may not be a great champion, but that does not mean he isn't a champion.

I agree his finals w-l is poor. That theoretically easy to fix, if he decides to win a few in a row. But yes. He is going to be 28, but so is Djokovic. And Nadal is a little older. I would say there is no shame in only being able to get 2 grandslams when the other 3 players have been playing.

[ICEMAN_9588]

Of course they are great achievements, I'm not saying the opposite.

But for me, in Grand Slams Murray is not at the same level of Djokovic, Nadal and Federer (maybe on the same level as the ACTUAL Federer).
It's not a shame, cause he is still a great player, but for instance, I think Del Potro is a much greater fighter on court.

[Vieira151]

I would agree. There isn't a huge amount of fight in him. He can fight when someone allows him to play his defensive scrambling game, but when he has to dig himself out against someone who does that better than him, he can't cope.

He is definitely not at that level in grandslams, but I'd argue he is the closest in the remaining pack. Barring a fully fit Del Potro. Who happens to have been one of my favourite players since he went on that run in 08 during the American hard court season.

[ICEMAN_9588]

Murray has also bad tactic choises.
He plays like he reall should (or at least like I think he should) only agst Federer, cause he knows he will be successful with offensive strategy.

When it comes to Nadal and Dojokovic, he keeps standing back 2 mt behind the baseline.
Those are the matches he needs to play more offensive.

[Otlichno]

I went to the AO this year, it was boring, like Murray's game.

I should've taken pictures of Hantuchova, she looks like she takes diet pills. All I know is, her game is like the single most amazing like thing ever like. I subtle with my posts. You see. I'm everyone's favorite poster. I know the best poster here loves me. And my game. I am no pusher.