Bangkok Final: Murray v Young

Young is clearly finding his way amongst the top 50 now, if he wins tomorrow he will be ranked 41st (just 150 points below being slam seeded). He had to comeback from 4-1 down in the 3rd set to eliminate Monfils, still I think he might come unstuck with his erratic serve against the forever ranked number 4.

Prediction:

Murray defeats Young 6-4 7-5

Young has some good talent but I doubt his mental strength when the pressure increases.

Yes, he really can mix it with the decent players now. Although, without a class serve he will struggle against top 10 players (as he did against Gael..)

I think this is a good one to watch. Shame it's not on tv. Young is the less well known of the new comers, as so far, apart from the USO exploit, has mainly played in the satellite circuit. This is clearly a big time chance to make his name ib the top league.

gosh, pitiful performance ......

Tenez wrote:Young has some good talent but I doubt his mental strength when the pressure increases.

There you go...

Well done AM - that's a nice beginning to the Asian swing for him. Wish I had seen it - what a disappointment these younger players are though - of course I wanted AM to win, but it would be good to see the top players made to work for their victories over the 'up and coming' players.

It's Tokyo next for AM right?

Tenez wrote:

Tenez wrote:Young has some good talent but I doubt his mental strength when the pressure increases.

There you go...

Young may have cracked top-50 this year. But I don't see any aspect of the game needed to win on which he can ride and continue moving up the ladder. He has reached top 50, but its not like he is a top 50 player. He got to the finals, won lesser points in total, broke lesser number of times, had lesser number of winners. It was more of Monfils letting it slip away.

Next year when he'll be defending those points I think he will be back to what a player with his level of game is generally at. Hovering around top 100. Unless he develops his game or gets even more fortunate.

I am not sure I agree there. He has the game to go through deeper in tournaments and it's just a question of time before added confidence will make him a regular top 20 player.

Bets on raiders!

Well Tenez, usually we do agree on lot of things. So it won't hurt for a change to be on different sides on this Donald Young matter .

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Well Tenez, usually we do agree on lot of things. So it won't hurt for a change to be on different sides on this Donald Young matter .

Exactly...it makes for healthy discussions!

Don't think we should judge Young on 1 bad performance, he did defeat Monfils from 4-1 down yesterday!

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Don't think we should judge Young on 1 bad performance, he did defeat Monfils from 4-1 down yesterday!

I saw him beat Stan in 5 sets at USO, very attractive player to watch.

Young's problem, apart from the obvious inconsistency from the baseline, is that he doesn't have much of a serve, so when he's playing Murray or even more so Djokovic he's going to get broken very often. Today he won 33% of points behind his first serve, which is quite frankly awful.

Gosh! Murray has stacked up a lot of these smaller tournament titles now hasn't he? I bet he can't get the door closed of his trophy cabinet with all these minor trinkets crammed in there!

time please wrote:Well done AM - that's a nice beginning to the Asian swing for him. Wish I had seen it - what a disappointment these younger players are though - of course I wanted AM to win, but it would be good to see the top players made to work for their victories over the 'up and coming' players.

It's Tokyo next for AM right?

Congratulations time please. Posts well into double figures on this topic and you are the only one gracious enough to congratulate the winner.

Well done Andy - 19 titles in the bag now and he is so close to Federer in the rankings he can smell his sweaty armpits.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well done Andy - 19 titles in the bag now and he is so close to Federer in the rankings he can smell his sweaty armpits.

Does it really make a difference being #3 or #4, even in a Slam?

CC closing the gap and ultimately overtaking Federer is all very well but then he's going to have to try to do the same to both Nadal and Djokovic.

Federer must already be on the decline so difficult for him to go anywhere but down now. Andy must be somewhere near his peak so it's time to see whether one or more slams is on the cards.

laverfan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well done Andy - 19 titles in the bag now and he is so close to Federer in the rankings he can smell his sweaty armpits.

Does it really make a difference being #3 or #4, even in a Slam?

Not much of a difference I suppose in slams apart from obviously getting very slightly better draw in the last 32/16/8 of those slams by getting higher numbered seeds. As for numerically wise obviously 3 is better than 4 and to be perfectly honest on this season's form alone Andy deserves the No.3 slot. Not over the career but definitely I'd say he has had a better year than Fed in slight decline so if Andy gets it he'll have earned it. You could equally say that I'd bet Fed would sooner be ranked 2 than 3 and Nadal sooner ranked 1 than 2.

newballs wrote:CC closing the gap and ultimately overtaking Federer is all very well but then he's going to have to try to do the same to both Nadal and Djokovic.

Federer must already be on the decline so difficult for him to go anywhere but down now. Andy must be somewhere near his peak so it's time to see whether one or more slams is on the cards.

Small steps it is all about small steps. I think it was Calder who was spot on. Andy is obviously not in the same class as the big three when it matters and consistently but equally he is far beyond the rest of the players in the world. In fact he is clearly a lot closer to those top three than he is to those seeded 5 and lower.

I would say being #2 is better than #3/#4. Hope Andy can push a bit harder to get to #2.

Time will tell.

It is to his massive credit though that he is able to remain in touch with such illustrious company. Roger Federer seen by many as the greatest of all-time, Rafael Nadal mooted by many a year or two ago to supersede Federer as the greatest of all-time and Djokovic who has been supreme this year - practically untouchable. That is the level of competition Andy has to compete against but he is a hell of a lot closer to them than any other men's player around in the game at the moment.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

It is to his massive credit though that he is able to remain in touch with such illustrious company. Roger Federer seen by many as the greatest of all-time, Rafael Nadal mooted by many a year or two ago to supersede Federer as the greatest of all-time and Djokovic who has been supreme this year - practically untouchable. That is the level of competition Andy has to compete against but he is a hell of a lot closer to them than any other men's player around in the game at the moment.

What posters miss here is that greatest of all-time isn't just a tag it means someone that supposedly stands above legends of the sport so Fed is seen by many as better than Borg, Sampras, Laver, Perry, Connors, McEnroe, Nadal, Lendl etc etc etc so it is no disgrace that Murray is slamless in this era so far.

Murray has the game to beat Nadal. I am really surprised he has not done so recently. Well he was not fully fit at Wimbledon so I can understand that one but was very surprised by his tamed display at the USO.

He was already a good match for Nadal 2 or 3 years ago...how come Nadal progressed faster than him since? That is the weird thing. As I was saying on the other thread, it seems even Federer has progressed faster than Murray in the last 3 years.

But things can change quickly. With Murray it's very much down to his body. I expect him to overtake Nadal next year for sure. I said last year at the same time that Djoko and Murray will overtake Nadal by end of 2011...I was just late by one year regarding Murray.

Tenez with Murray the key is in how he approaches these crunch matches and think Becker hit the nail on the head. Murray can and does win early matches in slams by playing conservatively as he is good enough to win those matches. Later on though in semis against big guns he goes into them 'cold' so as to speak and takes him time to get his aggressive game going and by the time he does the match is lost. He needs to play EVERY match at slams with the aggression and be in the groove straight away for the start of the key matches in semis and finals. Aggressive game was on song against Nadal in first set at Wimbledon and it blew him away but then self-=doubts crept in after a glaring miss and at US Open his aggressive game got going in the third set which he won but wasn't much left in the tank after that. Key is to play aggressively from Round One in Boris Becker's opinion and I agree.

Yes Becker is right there as well...though Murray lost v Nadal at Wimbledon cause his legs had gone. Watch the match again and you'll notice a significant drop in mobility and reaction time on the return...a bit like Federer v Tsonga actually.

Tenez I more or less agree with you. Murray got his game up to a standard where he was at a level where he could effectively challenge the top three (win some lose some) but in the last couple of years they have upped their game (especially Djokovic this year) where Murray level has stayed the same. I don't think he is a naturally agressive player so I don't think a full out agressive game would work for him long term. I think it's more on the mental side. He drops out of games for periods too often (e.g. Wimbledon semi). He can get away with this against most players but against the top three they cash in and it is more or less game over.

I find Murray quite strong mentally...until he has to deliver the winners himself.

Agree. His defence is excellent but he has issues playing agressively for a long period. He has the shots but if he misses a few (sometimes even one) he seems to lose confidence in them.

This is what happens when it is uncontrolled aggression and it does support Calder's assertion very well.

"Andy made an important mistake, an easy forehand, and that was probably a turning point in the match,” said Nadal, but there was no need for the ’probably’ in that sentence. No one should imagine that, had Murray made the shot, he would definitely have broken serve, and would then have almost certainly gone on to win, but he would have given himself every chance."

"Sometimes, I’ve come off the court and thought maybe I should have taken a few more chances but this time it was the other way. I went for it and started making mistakes. It was good for a set and a little bit, then went the other way,” said Murray, who undoubtedly stewed over that forehand error."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/8610653/Wimbledon-2011-Rafael-Nadal-crushes-Andy-Murrays-dream-yet-again.html

CaledonianCraig wrote:

laverfan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well done Andy - 19 titles in the bag now and he is so close to Federer in the rankings he can smell his sweaty armpits.

Does it really make a difference being #3 or #4, even in a Slam?

Not much of a difference I suppose in slams apart from obviously getting very slightly better draw in the last 32/16/8 of those slams by getting higher numbered seeds. As for numerically wise obviously 3 is better than 4 and to be perfectly honest on this season's form alone Andy deserves the No.3 slot. Not over the career but definitely I'd say he has had a better year than Fed in slight decline so if Andy gets it he'll have earned it. You could equally say that I'd bet Fed would sooner be ranked 2 than 3 and Nadal sooner ranked 1 than 2.

Bless you Craig, it would really hurt you to suggest Federer has had to fall a long way for Andy to pass him, wouldn't it?

Anyway, I join you in congratulating Murray and I'm sure he'll get to #2 sooner or later. He's a good player.

Tenez wrote:Murray has the game to beat Nadal. I am really surprised he has not done so recently. Well he was not fully fit at Wimbledon so I can understand that one but was very surprised by his tamed display at the USO.

He was already a good match for Nadal 2 or 3 years ago...how come Nadal progressed faster than him since? That is the weird thing. As I was saying on the other thread, it seems even Federer has progressed faster than Murray in the last 3 years.

But things can change quickly. With Murray it's very much down to his body. I expect him to overtake Nadal next year for sure. I said last year at the same time that Djoko and Murray will overtake Nadal by end of 2011...I was just late by one year regarding Murray.

Murray has the game to beat ANYONE. You know, Tenez, it's possible to discuss a topic on here without subtle or not-so-subtle derogatory references to Nadal

Anyway, I join you in congratulating Murray and I'm sure he'll get to #2 sooner or later. [quote]

If that will happen it has to be next year, while Nadal is still mourning 2 slam final losses and a gift at the French. I can see him making the final at AO again, if he doesn't play Djoko in the semi's at least.

mthierry wrote:

Tenez wrote:Murray has the game to beat Nadal. I am really surprised he has not done so recently. Well he was not fully fit at Wimbledon so I can understand that one but was very surprised by his tamed display at the USO.

He was already a good match for Nadal 2 or 3 years ago...how come Nadal progressed faster than him since? That is the weird thing. As I was saying on the other thread, it seems even Federer has progressed faster than Murray in the last 3 years.

But things can change quickly. With Murray it's very much down to his body. I expect him to overtake Nadal next year for sure. I said last year at the same time that Djoko and Murray will overtake Nadal by end of 2011...I was just late by one year regarding Murray.

Murray has the game to beat ANYONE. You know, Tenez, it's possible to discuss a topic on here without subtle or not-so-subtle derogatory references to Nadal

What on earth is wrong with this post mthierry - I think this is a case of you responding to other posts from Tenez you may not have liked, but there is nothing derogatory about Rafa here imo.