Tennis Prose




Oct/12

13

Has Murray Figured Out Federer?


Andy Murray posted an impressive win over Roger Federer 64 64 today at the Shanghai Masters Series semifinal. It was almost a dominating performance by Murray who seemed to return the Federer serve more effectively than usual, similar to how the Djokovic return has so often stymied Federer when it is ooperating a full precision.

Murray now leads the overall head to head with Federer by a 10-8 count, after winning their two most recent meetings (today and the Olympic final in August, which was by a score of 62 61 64). Murray has now won five straight sets from Federer, something he has never accomplished before. Murray won four matches in a row from Federer back in 2008-2009 but all four of those matches were extended to the three set limit.

One has to wonder now if Murray has finally figured out how to dominate and handle Federer?

Federer is the #1 player in the world and about to achieve his 300th week at the ATP throne but it can be said that perhaps Federer is winding down after such a physically demanding year – Federer has played 70 matches this year, compared to 63 for Murray. Federer has won six titles in 2012, Murray has won three.

But at age 31, you have to wonder if Federer is about to lose a fraction of his Federerness, and vacate the World #1 ranking, with Djokovic, Murray and most likely Nadal, perpetually nipping at his heels.

Federer himself said this week an interesting comment about how winning is no longer everything to him. He simply loves to play the game.

“”Sometimes you’re just happy playing. Some people, some media unfortunately don’t understand that it’s okay just to play tennis and enjoy it. They always think you have to win everything, it always needs to be a success story, and if it’s not obviously what is the point? Maybe you have to go back and think, Why have I started playing tennis? Because I just like it. It’s actually sort of a dream hobby that became somewhat of a job. Some people just don’t get that ever.”

44 comments

  • Steve · October 13, 2012 at 3:07 pm

    I watched either the same interview or a similar one. Fed seemed to be content. He’d like to end the year #1 but I don’t think it keeps him at night these days. It’s nice to see actually. He sitting with a pile of 17 slams. It’s gotta be sweet.

    Fed had a much better record for the year so far than Murray but the year isn’t over.
    Fed has found Murray’s game challenging for a long time. How was fast was the court in Shanghai?

  • Steve · October 13, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    Amazing point from the match. Fed out-pushing Murray midway in the point.
    http://youtu.be/6uYGxAKJtxY

  • Mitch · October 13, 2012 at 7:18 pm

    Fed’s struggled with counter-punchers like Murray, Simon and Canas. I wouldn’t make anything of this match or tournament. Fed plays sloppy sometimes, even in winning. Been going on for a few years.

  • Dan Markowitz · October 13, 2012 at 8:29 pm

    i didn’t hear Fed’s interview, but I’d say the meaning of his statement is not good for Fed. No one is saying, media or anyone else that Fed shouldn’t play because he loves the game. But let’s get real, this guy is tremendously competitive and if he starts losing a lot, he’s not going to think playing tennis is so much fun.

    I’m sure Agassi plays tennis now, he just doesn’t do it on the pro tour. No one’s saying you can’t enjoy playing the game or that if you lose a tournament it was a failure. But if you’re No. 1 and your name’s Roger Federer, I’m sorry, people are going to expect you to win and explore why you lost if you come up short.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    It’s gotta be a very difficult time for Federer, now with the ultra connfident Murray (with Lendl in his corner) emerging as a threat, with Djok and Nadal, Fed has three really complex rivals to contend with, not even considering Berdych, Delpo. I can see Fed finishing 2013 at #4. But we all know what happens to pundits who write off Federer – they get proven wrong.

  • Steve · October 14, 2012 at 12:07 am

    I think he’s actually still in the afterglow of winning Wimbledon & achieving #1 again and the minor comeback. He’s changed his stance in interviews and I think it’s great. He has achieved everything of note except for beating Nadal in a FO final but no one else has either.
    This match wasn’t a blow out so, like Mitch, I’m not too bothered. I don’t mind if he goes down to #12 as long I get to watch him play.

  • Gans · October 14, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    There were couple of uncharacteristic attributes to this match:
    1. Federer had trouble serving. Yeah, I know Murray is a great returner and all that, but Federer’s troubles appeared to be mostly self-inflicted. Robby commented that he had never ever seen Fed committing three DFs in one game! This was early in the first set.
    2. Federer stopped the play and was whining about the drizzle when the officials and Andy Murray wanted to continue play. It was rather obvious that the match could have been continued but Fed just didn’t want to.

    A champion of his stature should have handled the situation better. If Fed truly enjoyed just to play for the spirit of the sport as he had indicated in the interview (I read it only here though) why would he use such cheap delay tactics?

    Sorry, I don’t buy that argument of ‘am there to enjoy playing’. That was a very shady and lackluster performance from Rog.

  • Gans · October 14, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    Yes, I too believe Murray has figured out Federer. And I also believe, Andy Murray has figured out Nadal and Djokovic too.

    The only difference is execution and confidence. I am sure Nadal, Djokovic and Federer always knew that Andy had the potential to dominate all three of them once he plays to his potential.

    I can feel that Djokovic’s camp is concerned about Murray just as Nadal camp were deeply worried about Djokovic’s rise in 2011.

    I am so so looking forward to tomorrow’s match between the two best players in the world right now.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    Gans 3 doubles by Fed was maybe the first time that EVER happened. Was it the pressure of facing such a dangerous and newly confident adversary which flustered the mighty Fed? Murray made Fed uncomfortable throughout the match and he looked like he always knew it was in the bag which had to bother Fed. Also agree Fed caused that long delay when he really didn’t have to. I guess Fed’s competitive instincts took over at the end, he just did not want to lose and when you are at the edge of the cliff you have to play all your cards. Murray handled it perfectly though. It was also odd to see Fed take that angry swipe with his racquet after missing the return on the first point of the 3-4 game in the second set.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    Gans, Murray always did have the potential – he beat Federer in four consecutive three set matches back in 08-09. But for some reason he kept bungling it when they met in majors. With Lendl he has finally put it all together. Murray and Djokovic are so very similar in style and mindset but it looks like Murray is the physically stronger of the two while Djok could be the slightly more agile and athletic. Fascinating rivalry this could turn into.

  • Steve · October 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm

    In what universe is 6-4, 6-4 a dominating performance? Murray played well and Fed had a bad serving day but let’s not get crazy.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2012 at 3:13 pm

    It was never in doubt Steve, Murray was in total control. And it’s now five straight sets over Federer. It appears Federer is going to have his hands full with Murray over the course of the next 12 months and beyond.

  • Dan Markowitz · October 14, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    I think Murray is the best player in the world now. He’s put together the complete package. Djokovic fought off match points today and won rather easily in the third set, but I felt Murray was the better player in the first two sets. Djokovic is a tremendous fighter and he doesn’t wear the ankle guards that Murray does and he usually doesn’t incur the injuries that Murray–real or phantom–deals with.

    Murray’s forehand has gotten monstrous. Would love to hear what Lendl told him or had him practice to build it up from a liability to a strength. But Murray when Lendl isn’t around–like in today’s match–he reverts back to the barking at himself which doesn’t seem to help his mental or physical state of mind.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2012 at 4:23 pm

    Dan; Murray is undoubtedly the Player of the Year he has it wrapped up no matter what happens from here on out. It’s neck and neck right now who is the better player Djokovic or Murray, looks like that will be the next big ATP rivalry.

  • Steve · October 14, 2012 at 5:22 pm

    It was only a few months ago that Fed out-classed Murray in Wimbledon. Murray is playing great and Lendl was the key but Fed did not bring his A game or serve well. You have to be troubled that Murray couldn’t get it done with 5 match points. If Fed did this you’d be screaming collapse of the century.

  • Dan Markowitz · October 14, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    I think Fed is at the point in his career where anything he does–or did this year- that is big, like winning Wimbledon and reaching the Olympics final, is gravy. I mean only Connors and Agassi won slams at 31 or over in my lifetime and most of the greats petered out much earlier.

  • mat4 · October 14, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    We always try to foresee the futur in our comments. 2008 should have been a year of Fed’s dominance; 2009 Rafa’s year, 2010 Fed’s revival; 2011 Rafa on Roger’s heels; 2012 Novak’s consecration.

    But, as we saw it, it turned differently each time. Players change, get older, improve or get hurt. Years pass but don’t look alike. Then there’s luck, wind, rain, details that change results, tournament winners, careers.

    Yesterday, we saw Murray win; today he lost. Djokovic served two sets under 50% (in fact, he was a bit above); in the third, he improved his serve and won. You simply never know. And that’s the beauty of our beloved sport.

  • Steve · October 14, 2012 at 11:24 pm

    Well, now we head indoors. Should be interesting. Free of tornados and rain.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 12:06 am

    Steve I don’t think Federer would ever blow 5 MPs but when a fired up Djokovic is on the other side of the court, you never know. Myself or Dan or nobody that I know of called Fed’s loss to Djokovic at the 2011 US Open the collapse of the century, think that match and this one today have more to do with the magic of Mr. Djokovic than choking, though I did not see the final today. Djokovic is just an absolute magician.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 12:10 am

    Agree Dan I don’t think Federer has the same motivation and inspiration anymore. He’s been there done that, it’s just not the same after you’ve been doing it for over ten years now. It’s just off a fraction or so, but those fractions are often the difference. But Fed can turn back the clock and strike again at any time, like he showed at Wimbledon. He is always dangerous. There are still many tricks left in his bag.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 12:24 am

    Mat4, Some people have an uncanny ability to see things though. Pancho Segura was at the Open the year Delpo won it and before it even started he was talking about how Delpo was better than Murray because of his serve and he liked Delpo to win the Open and sure enough he was right. Segura also called Rafter to win the year he won his first which was not a conventional pick either. John McEnroe called Federer to win Wimbledon this year, that was an ace pick. Eric Taino predicted Marcelo Rios would be ATP #1 someday, he predicted this when they were still juniors. So while the sport is very very unpredictable for so many reasons, also sometimes certain gurus can see the future.

  • mat4 · October 15, 2012 at 1:09 am

    Scoop,

    it is not a question of potential, talent or abilities. We can predict a lot of things, but others are still left beyond our scope.

    Take this little example: we know that Rafa, Novak and Andy tend to fare better when they serve first after the pause. They simply exhaust their opponents with their defence. Today, Novak served first in the first two sets, and his percentage of first serves was 59% and 53%, In the third, he served second, after the rest between games, and his percentage was 71%.

    It happened yesterday in the match between Andy and Roger. Roger’s serve stats were 53 and 62%. What if… Roger served when he was fresh, after the pauses? Could it have changed the result this time? Was it just a matter of coin toss?

    We always knew JMDP potential, but, watching his FH, I always thought he could have problems with his hip. Who could have predicted it would be the wrist? Who could have predicted that his draws, in 2011, would be so difficult at the slams, closing the door for a better ranking? (I predicted it when I noticed the pattern, but it is another long story. Anyway, watch now Murray land in Djokovic’s half at Bercy.)

    There are so many little things that matters in today’s fierce competition, and the margins are so tiny. That was the point of my post, although I am not sure I expressed it clearly.

    Another thing: watching matches the last two days, I was really impressed by the level of play of the top three. It is simply frightening, even when they don’t play well.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2012 at 9:31 pm

    Or it just comes down to who wants it more Mat4 : ) Djokovic had a little extra incentive today as he lost to Murray in NYC. Revenge is a motivation he had today which Murray did not. Agree though, there are so many factors involved in the outcome of a big match, tennis is a very very complicated and precise game!

  • Mitch · October 14, 2012 at 9:47 pm

    Djokovic didn’t have the same revenge incentive at the US Open for the Olympic loss? I think in general, you over-ascribe narratives.

  • Steve · October 15, 2012 at 12:17 am

    “we know that Rafa, Novak and Andy tend to fare better when they serve first after the pause.” Actually Rafa almost always receives when playing Fed usually making the coin toss irrelevant.

    Delpo’s forehand motion is kind of like a slap, I’m sure some guru saw the potential of injury but also there’s a tennis rumor that it was also time for a mental break for the tall Argentine.

    Confidence level, weather, injuriers, surface and some people here put a lot of stock in Fed’s age. I think my worst prediction(there are a bunch) was that I thought Alize Cornet was going to be a top level player after seeing her play in person –she just never got physically strong enough I guess. But I had some sweet predictions come true this year –it’s fun esp. when a player you like can prove the naysayers wrong one more time! 🙂

  • Dan Markowitz · October 15, 2012 at 5:48 am

    It’s not that Fed doesn’t have the motivation anymore, I think he’s at the everything is gravy stage now because his competition is so good he can’t expect to beat them regularly and he knows his expectations can’t be so high. On a grass court or a fast hard court or in the desert where the ball flies more, Fed has a chance, but everywhere else now, he’s the underdog.

    And I think you can make predictions, especially in today’s game. Players like Djoko, Murray and Nadal never lose. Their fitness levels and games are too ironclad (who knows, after reading in the last few days about Lance Armstrong’s doping prowess, maybe these guys are champions at that part of the game, too. You ever wonder who those big beefy guys in Djoko’s and Murray’s box.really are? Ostensibly, they’re weight guys or trainer, but do you really need two guys in addition to a coach and manager to travel with you?)

    In the old days, a Chris Lewis or Mariana Puerta would reach the finals of a slam, but today it never happens. I’ll name you the four slam winners for next year in a group of four players (Djoko, Murray, Nadal and Fed). Would ant one else be so bold to say I’m wrong? If I had to narrow it down to two, I’d bet anyone with some mild odds that Djoko and Murray win every slam.

    Look, no one knows about Nadal, but an injury like Derek Jeter’s, we saw it, he broke his ankle. What did Nadal do to be out so long? Tendinitis, he’s 26 and in great shape with thei best health care in the world and he’s out 6 months. Name one other player in another sport where that’s happened to a player? John Starks back in 1994 tore his meniscus, had surgery and was back in either 4 or6 weeks to play and ignite the Knicks into the finals. What’s happened with Nadal is highly irregular.

  • mat4 · October 15, 2012 at 6:00 am

    @Steve:

    Serving in second at the beginning of the set means serving first after a rest. Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough.

    @Dan:

    Everyone of us has noticed when top players beef up suddenly. It became a science, and a game. At least two top four changed their overall shape in a few months. The third improved his health but lost weight. Just look at the other top ten, top twenty… And it is not something that started two, or three years ago.

  • loreley · October 15, 2012 at 7:01 am

    “Players like Djoko, Murray and Nadal never lose. Their fitness levels and games are too ironclad (who knows, after reading in the last few days about Lance Armstrong’s doping prowess, maybe these guys are champions at that part of the game, too. You ever wonder who those big beefy guys in Djoko’s and Murray’s box.really are? Ostensibly, they’re weight guys or trainer, but do you really need two guys in addition to a coach and manager to travel with you?)”

    I have the same thoughts sometimes. Unfortunately.

    Murray’s legs are incredible strong.

    http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbw5k4lu6G1qb2wsio1_r1_500.jpg

  • Dan Markowitz · October 15, 2012 at 7:35 am

    Ooh la la, Lorely, that’s the best pic I’ve ever seen of Andy’s hammys. No, or yes, I’d like to see a size by side pictorial of Murray’s leg from say, 2009 to the present. Maybe that’s why he’s always reaching for his back or his hammys because he’s developed them so much in last few years or maybe tennis players aren’t supposed to have legs that big. It’s amazing, the guy used to push his forehand and now he pulverized it.

    We were told that WADA does this air-tight testing of players in sports like tennis and cycling, but the in the Lance reports I read that he had very little out of competition testiing and then his doctors knew which drugs couldn’t be detected and the how to mask for the drugs that did show up on testing. One race where testers showed up when they weren’t supposed to, Armstrong just pulled out of the event. sound familiar?

    Look the fact of the matter is that if the Top 4 were caught doping. You think the Aussie Open would be raising the purse winnings? I found it very odd when I was in Toronto that Djoko’s manager wouldn’t let me talk to Djoko’s hitting partner or physiologist. Not that they’re going to say anything to me, but these guys run a tight ship.

    There are just wonderings and observations of body types, but does Djoko go from being a guy who drops out of multiple slam matches to being a indefatigable warrior just because he switches to a gluten-free diet? Does Ivan Lendl go from being a. Specima of a human being in his 20’s to a guy with a bad backnand a fatso in his 50’s?

  • Steve · October 15, 2012 at 8:32 am

    @Mat4. Okay I was confused cause of the next paragraph. Obviously in Nadal’s case there’s a pause after each & every point for his little adjustments. 🙂 I don’t think serving first is that big of a deal in the modern game of the top four but if you have serving duel on your hands then yeah.

    To paraphrase Cliff Drysdale: men’s tennis has always been prone to domination by one or two players. Since there’s no proof they are juicing why bring it up? There was an avalanche of proof on Armstrong. Also, look at what they did to Gasquet and he wasn’t even juicing, I guess he was partying. Tennis seems pretty strict.

    You can’t compare baseball players that hardly move in 9 innings of play to the top tennis guys. Remember Djoker is very public about getting his edge. He sat in that egg shaped device to help recover. I also have no vibe that Federer or Nadal are cheating. There’s no evidence. And Murray has been hitting the weights for well over a year if not longer.

    Look at the dominant players of the past. It’s the nature of men’s tennis most of the time.

    On a totally dif. note, I’m amazed by Djoker’s psyche on court. I’ve never really seen someone be able to applaud their opponent’s shot making and then smash a racquet in disgust and stay focused. He handles these extremes well. I think the Sampras route is equally as effective but I’ve never seen this.

  • Dan Markowitz · October 15, 2012 at 8:47 am

    I meant to say that Lendl was a physical specimen and then 20 years later has turned into a fatso. He really has quite a gut and that is odd because between the aerobics he did, the bike riding, swimming and tennis training, the guy was as fit as a banjo. And look at JMac or Connors (even with his hips replaced or Borg) none of these guys have gotten fat. If anything, Johnny Mac is as skinny as Vitas Gerulaitis used to be.

    So was Lendl juicing or doing something of that ilk back in the 70’s-80’s? I wouldn’t put it past him. These guys take extreme measures to become champions? Does that include taking testosterone or HGH, I, for one, would not be very surprised if that was the case.

    We all see that in tennis, particularly, the line between being No. 1 and say, John-Paul Fruttero is not so big. And just because you do juice, i.e. Fruttero and Odesnik, doesn’t mean you’re going to make it to No. 1. But Armstrong denied and denied, he said look at my tests I’ve never tested positive, and then if these were reports are right, and they seem too extensive not to be, he not only juiced, but he set up the whole program for his team. And why Armstrong? He had success and was willing to risk more to gain more success and he also had the money to get the best doctors to help him get the best stuff and elude the testers.

    I think if you really want to legitimize the sport, you do the testing out in the open where journalists can watch it, and you check their urine, blood and their bodies to see if they have been received any injections. You make this public to certain unbiased journalists who can report on the proceedings.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 8:56 am

    And the really weird part is Nadal showed no sign of injury in the Rosol match, he did not call any injury timeout, all the sudden a few days after the match he comes up with the knee injury. Some might buy it some might not, you never know what the real truth of the matter is. Hey, did anyone see the doc 9.79 about Carl Lewis and Ben Johnson on ESPN? Great doc, one of the best ever. At the end, the drug tester Don Catlin said he saved the samples from 1984 and went back with the new testing technology and found tons of banned substances, basically implying that Lewis and others in the race tested positive. But Catlin decided to do nothing about it, there’s no reason to, he reasoned. Fascinating stuff. Like Loreley, one has to wonder about tennis sometimes, are these teams of the top players as ultra sophisticated like the cycling and sprinting teams? We may never know.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 8:58 am

    Murray is to me probably the physically strongest player in tennis right now. Do you remember how scrawny and fragile he used to be? He has worked very hard at it, lots of pullups and 400 meter sprints. The work has paid off. But his brother Jamie has the physique of what Andy used to look like, very physically average.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 9:02 am

    Dan calling Lendl fatso twice lol. Lendl was around in the 80s and like I said in the 1984 Olympics, the tester Dr. Don Catlin found tons of illegal substances in the samples of the 1984 100 meter final runners recently when he tested the old samples with the new testing technology, so anything is possible I guess. Wasn’t Lyle Alzado an NFL player in the 80s when he allegedly died of overuse of steroids?

  • Dan Markowitz · October 15, 2012 at 9:32 am

    Well, Alzado actually did most of his playing in the 70’s, Scoop. Sad story, how he died at 43 of a brain tumor he thought might’ve been brought on from his steroid use:

    I look at the way Murray seems to go nuts after missing a shot and I think, “Is this because the guy is so fiery and competitive or is it Roger Clemens, steroid-induced bile?” But then Johnny Mac was pretty bombastic back in the day, and I don’t think he was taking steroids, I think he was and still is to a certain extent, nuts and a tyrant.

    But look at the Lendl went from being a waif to a pretty muscled and powerful guy. He used to look like Mats Wilander in stature. I wouldn’t put anything past Lendl as far as taking or doing what he had to do to reach the top. And his health issues at the end of his career and the way he looks now, I don’t know. I never had a habitual bad back. I just had my left his resurfaced and I can tell you it’s easy in my mind to put on weight and get fat. All I’m doing is walking around on crutches right now, down my block mostly. But I make it a point not to eat as much and when I get my movement back, I’m back on the stationary bike and swimming and then hopefully in a couple of months back to playing tennis.

    You look at McEnroe and Connors, they kept on playing, they never got heavy. Lendl, I couldn’t believe it when I saw him close up in Toronto. The guy has a major gut. I’m thinking, “This is Ivan Freakin’ Lendl, had this guy get such a gut?” I know playing golf all the time isn’t great for a workout, but unless you’re eating sandwiches over the Back 9, you don’t get that heavy. I don’t know how he’s going to play these Senior matches against guys like Mac and Sampras and Andre, if he looks like that.

    But then, I can’t believe Mac beat Chang last week 6-2. How does that happen?

  • Steve · October 15, 2012 at 9:40 am

    In the Sampras book there’s a section about the time he spent with Lendl training with him. It was grueling. Lendl’s work ethic & focus on fitness is legend. Of course you’ll get fat once you stop and keep eating. The metabolism slows as we get older too. Mac works out more now. Has a personal trainer that makes him run in sand. Lendl was playing golf and chilling.

  • loreley · October 15, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Novak’s Austrian fitness coach talks sometimes with Austrian media. They worked on different things. Stronger fingers for example 😉

    http://sport10.at/home/mehrsport/tennis/690846/Gritsch_Der-DjokovicMacher?_vl_backlink=/home/mehrsport/index.do

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Mitch my analysis of the US Open final is that Murray just wanted it more. Djokovic leveled it at two sets but Murray came out smoking in the fifth set and showed how much he really wanted it. I think Murray’s desire deflated Djokovic a bit. It happens in sports, especially boxing. A trainer told me that sometimes a fighter has so much hunger and desire, that the opponent takes one look in his eye at the weigh in or staredown and is beaten on the spot. I know it sounds absurd to you a tennis guy but this trainer is big time and was involved with a Hall of Fame boxer. We were at the weigh in of Felix Trinidad and William Joppy and he said he saw Joppy look into Tito’s eyes and he just deflated. Of course, he was 100% right, Trinidad ended up KOing Joppy the next night. I believe Murray’s amped up intensity in the start of the fifth set did something to Djokovic. Though Djokovic came back strong yesterday to get revenge on Murray. Barely.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    Loreley, thanks for posting but it’s hard to understand German ) Djokovic is one of the greatest athletes I have ever seen as far as agility, speed, power, and the uncanny ability to strike with offense from the most extreme defensive position. He is the ultimate tennis machine I have ever seen. Still think he plays superior tennis to Nadal and Federer — when he’s playing his absolute best tennis. In other words, I think Djokovic took tennis to a new higher level above Fed and Rafa, and he played the best tennis the world has ever seen – particularly last year and I expect to see even more of it next year. Surely Fed, Rafa and Murray will have something to say but there excellence might inspire Djok to new heights. As Mat4 would say, you just never know, We’ll see.

  • Steve · October 15, 2012 at 9:19 pm

    Federer still has a better forehand and serve than Djoker most days and was the better mover on the court until maybe recently.

  • Mitch · October 15, 2012 at 10:50 pm

    You may have liked Murray at the start of the USO final, but did you really believe he would win after Djokovic took the fourth, given his recent history of epic comebacks? If so, kudos to you.

  • Dan Markowitz · October 16, 2012 at 5:55 am

    I agree with you, Mitch. I felt that Murray got a little lucky with the wind and took the lead, but when Djoko caught him, I didn’t expect Djoko to run out of gas. But in Shanghai, I thought Murray looked the better of the two, until he kind of imploded. So it’s interesting. Murray is showing a power and an ability to negate Djoko’s backhand and we all know that when it comes to the game around the net, Murray is superior to Djoko.

  • Panama · October 24, 2012 at 9:10 am

    Federer is not the only one hoping to be a repeat winner this year. Americans Bob and Mike Bryan are clear of the field in the race to claim the ATP World Tour No. 1 Doubles Team Award. It would be their fourth in the row, their seventh in the last eight years. They must surely be in contention to take the Fans’ Favourite Award in the doubles category, too: They have won it for the last six years.

  • Scoop Malinowski · October 24, 2012 at 10:07 am

    The Bryans have won one major this year, right Panama? It’s been a very good year for them but not their best. They should take #1 again. Outside of Paes/Stepanek there doesn’t seem to be another very strong consistent team this year in doubles. Outside of the Bs and the Poles, it seems most teams mix and match every year or six months. Wonder who the next great doubles team will be after the Bs?

<<

>>

Find it!

Copyright 2010
Tennis-Prose.com
To top