MURRAY TARGETS TOP 3 FINISH TO YEAR

First topic message reminder :

After his straight sets Qtr final win against Dimitrov, Murray in a interview admitted that he is looking to finish in the top 3 by the year end.

"By playing the full Asian stretch, there is a chance for me to try and move my ranking up by one spot, which is something I want to do by the end of the year,"

Now to me it looks like Murray has changed a bit. For a player who has finished in in top 4 for the last 3 years have have been consitently there and has even seen a highest raking of #2 and played 3 GS finals and reaching the SF of all the 4 GS in 2011, this is a low ambition. Why should it matter for him even if he finishes within top 3 this year? What he thinks he can achieve even if he finished in top-3. It could have been important for a player who has never seen a top 3, but for Murray it looks odd. He could have said that he looks to reach the finals and even win the last prestigious tournament WTF. Why he is playing the full asian swing? I see this as an opportunistic decision more than anything else. Why are these small ATP250 and 500 tournaments so important for him when he himself complains about the tour being so long and threatens for possible strike. He could have taken an injury break and come up well prepared for shanghai, Bercy and WTF. It looks like he knows that he too is defending some good points in the coming months and hence must gain enough with small tournament wins, in order to maintain his points. Nadal did just this by playing Barcelona, even risking what he suffered in 2009 clay season and beyond. Why?? else he would have lost his #1 before wimbledon itself. http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/04/16/Barcelona-Monday-Nadal-Eyes-Opportunity.aspx

Murray is trying something similar.

Also I think he seems frustrated with the fact that he never gets a mention in the top 3 players and its always said that the big 3 are way ahead of the rest and he wants to show his critics that by finishing in top-3 he now has earned the right to be counted in that league. Though it still will be on paper as even at #4, Fed will always be a better player. He I believe has seen this as a great opportunity. Federer now has a lot of points to defend. He is already planned to miss shanghai and has a semis spot to defend at Bercy and a WTF win. By the look of things its going to be tough for him. So this is Murray's best chance to finish in top 3 and say something like "Hey.. I'm in top 3.. I must get mention in being the top 3 players on tour now and I am better than Federer now.." etc etc.

Lets see what are your thought on why is it important for Murray to finish in top 3.

Craig - of course Andy is not greedy, and he usually plays more or less exactly the same as the other top players. I think if this forum is to keep pace with topical news, there is certainly room for a thread to point out that Murray's decision to play a very full and exhausting looking schedule at this point in the season is at odds with his recent support for Rafa's very angry comments about the schedule. Now Murray was measured and controlled in everything he said, but Rafa was quite angry and accused the ATP and the ITF of not caring about the players and just wanted to basically work them into the ground for money. Andy's comments to a journalist were because he was asked about Rafa's comments and R's claims that top players supported him.

I think it is interesting to note, if we are keeping abreast of news, that Andy has chosen to play a very full schedule now to rack up some points to overtake TMF - which is exactly what he should do - he should be looking to improve his ranking and really set himself up to build on a fantastic year and take it, hopefully, a couple of steps further next year at a major. He is, by playing such a packed schedule at this time of the year, highlighting that players will all have different needs and perhaps the tour should remain as packed with tournaments as it is now in order to cater for different needs, but that maybe the number of mandatories for a top player should be reduced - but please bear in mind, and I say this in light not of Andy's comments, but Rafa's quite antagonistic stance recently, that top players are required to play 18 mandatories and Rafa has already played 20 - that is what I am questioning, and furthermore is playing an exhibition in Mexico (the other end of the globe) in December when the tour allows him some down time, more of which is what he was asking for??? It's a little perplexing. I know this thread is about Murray and not about Nadal, but I think that as AM's comments to journalists were in response to Rafa's outburst in Cordoba, it is not entirely unrelated.

As for comments about antagonism in the thread - I quite agree. But it is a shame if we all have to steer clear of controversial issues to some just because of lack of courtesy from posters with a different point of view. Can't we all be adults, have different views, bring up topical issues and just either debate maturely, or move on - where is that facepalm emoticon when you need it

Hi CC, remember that Andy has lost in the first round of four tournaments this year (taking into account byes), and has played the least number of matches of the top four players this year.

name......................matches played this year
Djokovic..................67
Nadal......................72
Federer...................61
Murray....................56

Nore Staat wrote:Hi CC, remember that Andy has lost in the first round of four tournaments this year (taking into account byes), and has played the least number of matches of the top four players this year.

name......................matches played this year
Djokovic..................67
Nadal......................72
Federer...................61
Murray....................56

The above highlights that Rafa is complaining about being successful I am only jesting Rafa fans, but it does show that if players are feeling the wear and tear because they are consistently going deep, then perhaps they have to tweak their own schedules.

time please wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:Hi CC, remember that Andy has lost in the first round of four tournaments this year (taking into account byes), and has played the least number of matches of the top four players this year.

name......................matches played this year
Djokovic..................67
Nadal......................72
Federer...................61
Murray....................56

The above highlights that Rafa is complaining about being successful I am only jesting Rafa fans, but it does show that if players are feeling the wear and tear because they are consistently going deep, then perhaps they have to tweak their own schedules.

Quite right tp. I think Nadal's comments were borne, at least in part, out of frustration at losing again to Djokovic - there must be a build-up of real disappointment there. So, rather than complaing about being successful he is complaining about not being quite as successful as he'd hoped...

Positively 4th Street wrote:Perhaps he just wants to set himself a motivational target for the rest of the year. Seems simple and sensible to me, in the absence of slams there can be a feeling of marking time in this part of the season (certainly before the O2). Why would he not want to get to #3?

Tell me where did I say its wrong to aim at #3. I never said it's wrong. But what I said and still say it is wrong being a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and a betrayer who keep double standards and changes his stand when he sees an advantage. Murray has showed every bit if these qualities in his behavior. No matter how much his fan deny it, this is what your hero is.

Its not at all a crime punishable by any law. No No. But would you like and be fans of people who have these traits? Not me. Why not Murray fans accept that he is a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and so be it and they still love him. I'm fine with that.

Your greedy claim has already been blown out of the water raiders as shown by above stats. Murray going by those stats is the least greedy if anything. And check your definition of fanboy before labelling people with it in future please. Check out many posts where I've criticised Murray for needing to be more aggressive, perhaps not having a full-time coach and check US Open threads where I tipped Nadal to beat Murray.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:Perhaps he just wants to set himself a motivational target for the rest of the year. Seems simple and sensible to me, in the absence of slams there can be a feeling of marking time in this part of the season (certainly before the O2). Why would he not want to get to #3?

Tell me where did I say its wrong to aim at #3. I never said it's wrong. But what I said and still say it is wrong being a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and a betrayer who keep double standards and changes his stand when he sees an advantage. Murray has showed every bit if these qualities in his behavior. No matter how much his fan deny it, this is what your hero is.

Its not at all a crime punishable by any law. No No. But would you like and be fans of people who have these traits? Not me. Why not Murray fans accept that he is a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and so be it and they still love him. I'm fine with that.

Hmmmmm. Do you think you could accept being a hypocrite who talks from his ring hole?

A lot of posters, non-Murray fans included have that view of your ramblings and non-sensical gibberish is nothing more than player bashing and that your not in impartial in anyway.

If you accept that, I might consider your view.

CaledonianCraig wrote:
As for positive articles about Murray - why not? After all he is world No.4, one of a handful of players in tennis history to reach all slam semis in a calendar year, won 19 ATP titles, is the best British mens player since the 1930's, is statistically one of the best returners of serve in tennis at the moment and lots more. So plenty to be positive about but you only think negative - that is nothing to be proud of at all just pretty pathetic. It also backs up what I have said before in that people harp on about Murray not winning a slam but I say does it really matter? In the context of hate-filled posters such as yourself then no it doesn't matter as it wouldn't change your hate-filled mind. Heck he could even do the calendar grand slam and there would be no credit. You stick to your hate-filled posts if you wish and I'll stick to the tennis.

This is so typical of you CC. Some time back and even many times I said (even on this thread), you have a major Murray fanboy syndrome. For every question put to you, you have this long list of Murray's achievements ready as you reply and you doing it again here. Next time bring out some songs you wrote in his praise after Murray reached semis of all 4 slams in a year.

Now see how you say this:

It also backs up what I have said before in that people harp on about Murray not winning a slam but I say does it really matter?

And in this very thread you were saying you are not a blind fanboy who will support his player no matter what. Yet here you have proved it yourself. Congratulation!!


You have a picture of Andy Murray in your profile. And of course you are no fanboy.

I rest my case.

Let me point something out to you ROTLA

I have seen many posters on here accused of Wummery and being anti this, that and the other. Whenever they make their posts, albeit I may not agree with them on all accounts, they stick to their beliefs on certain subject matter.

All you do is 'I didn't say this, or where did I say that or your just a fanboy'

Posters disagree with each other.

At least have the guts to stick to your belief instead of just twisting words and try to make out your intentions are taken out of context!

I know the purpose of this thread and it's to discredit the guy and nothing else!!!

In a time when event ogranisers complain about the lack of star power in their events, and when a top ranked player duly oblieges he is greedy?

So when Sharapova and Djokovic are offered vast amounts of sponsorship money for their racquet providers, they are not greedy?

When Federer fronts just about every commercial during GS events that is not greed?

Get a grip!!!

Raider your original post was quite valid. You really asked three questions.

Why it is important for Murray to become number 3 this year ?

If he does achieve it will he then think he is superior to Federer ?

Why is he playing an extra tournament (remember it just one a compared with his schedule of last year) ater complaining about the schedule being too crowded ?

All fair questions in IMO. However you then dilute your credibility but making statements like :

'a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and a betrayer who keep double standards and changes his stand when he sees an advantage.'

and

'people should not look up to him gamewise, credibility wise and personality wise'

then insulting anyone who tries to debate with you by calling them Fanboys.

Lets just accept the fact you don't like Murray. That's your perogative I'm not going try and change that.

As you may have seen if you take your blinkers off you do not seem to be getting much support for your views on this thread even from posters who are not Murray supporters.

I think I have given my answers to the first two questions previously in that he has himself a goal for the remainder of this season . Life is all about setting goals nowadays. I do not believe he will see himself as being superior to Federer if he does achieve this.

As for why did he play this one extra event. I can't read his mind but know that last year he got knocked out early in Bejing and even this week he said that he seems to take longer to get over jetlag when travelling east. So maybe it is just a case of getting out there early and getting some game time in a tournament where the games are unlikely to be of an intensity that you would get in a Masters1000 or GS event. Therefore preparing himself better for the bigger tournaments to come.

Again remember it is only one extra event he has played. Do you expect him not to play in any others until Roger comes back or by playing in them is he being opportunistic.

I for one don't see Murray as being perfect and am happy to debate his strengths/weaknesses in a sensible manner.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:Perhaps he just wants to set himself a motivational target for the rest of the year. Seems simple and sensible to me, in the absence of slams there can be a feeling of marking time in this part of the season (certainly before the O2). Why would he not want to get to #3?

Tell me where did I say its wrong to aim at #3. I never said it's wrong. But what I said and still say it is wrong being a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and a betrayer who keep double standards and changes his stand when he sees an advantage. Murray has showed every bit if these qualities in his behavior. No matter how much his fan deny it, this is what your hero is.

Its not at all a crime punishable by any law. No No. But would you like and be fans of people who have these traits? Not me. Why not Murray fans accept that he is a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and so be it and they still love him. I'm fine with that.

Tell me where I said that you said it's wrong! We could go around in circles. You are interpreting my post at being aimed solely at you, it was not. Try to be less sensitive.

The OP does pose the question as to why Murray would be so keen to get to #3, and that was my answer. This strike talk has been blown out of all proportion, it's just hot air.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote: ... what I said and still say it is wrong being a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and a betrayer who keep double standards and changes his stand when he sees an advantage. Murray has showed every bit if these qualities in his behavior. No matter how much his fan deny it, this is what your hero is.

...Why not Murray fans accept that he is a greedy opportunistic hypocrite and so be it and they still love him. ...

Are we still talking about tennis here?

It seems you have fairly intense negative feelings towards Andy Murray and his supporters.

It seems you have fairly intense negative feelings towards Andy Murray and his supporters.

Wonder why that could be. Murray seems like an endearing angel both on and off the courts...

Murray's goals no doubt include winning several slams and reaching No. 1. He can't do either in 2011.

What he can do in 2011 is avoid giving up the year for dead and seek to maximise his ranking by trying to win as many tournaments/matches as he can in conditions (indoor hard) that suit his game. He has played less matches than the others in the top 4 because of his lengthy drop in form after the AO final so he has some gas left in the tank to exploit and I think that's what he should do.

If he did not have the immediate aim of being y/e No. 3 I'd be shocked - what he says makes complete sense. Anyway - the more points he gains now the better chance he has of breaking into the top 2 next year.

Long term this is another curate's egg of a year from Murray - the third in a row since his improvement in 2008 suggested he might be on the verge of a breakthrough. He's definitely one of the best players not to have won a slam - 7 TMs wins tells its story - but I feel no more confident for him than ever I did, if anything a bit less since 2009 when I thought it was a question of if not when.

barrystar wrote:Murray's goals no doubt include winning several slams and reaching No. 1. He can't do either in 2011.

What he can do in 2011 is avoid giving up the year for dead and seek to maximise his ranking by trying to win as many tournaments/matches as he can in conditions (indoor hard) that suit his game.

I don't think Murray will ever win several GSs. If he really, as you seem to believe, has set such ambitious targets, this would be naive and counterproductive for his career. Murray should focus on winning one. That would be a great achievement and the fulfilment of his potential. Personally I am a little skeptical he ever will.

As for the current season: there is still at stake the WTF. It would be a terrific goal to win the finals, which would greatly enhance his standing in the world of tennis. Yet he has not been able to do so, by now.

JK - of course Murray would be focused on winning his first one, but I don't think he's the sort of player who'd believe that if he got just one that would be the pinnacle and he could go home for tea and cakes - I am sure he wants to win that first one as a stepping stone to greater things.

As far as 2011 is concerned, I'm sure he'll want to win the WTF when he gets there, his quote was in the context of what he could do in Asia, as he said

By playing the full Asian stretch....

. It won't dull his prospects for London given he's played relatively few matches this year and given the particular focus of his remark it's not fair to slag him off for what he did not say.

I have no issues with players being greedy for money and working for several commercials and ad campaigns. I have no issues with players playing maximum possible tournaments to gain ranking points. I have no issues with players having ambitions with their rankings.

But I have issues when player shows double standards. I have issues when players change their stand to gain advantage. I have issues when players complain ATP for its packed schedule, long calender, too many tournaments and how its hurting the top players and then do a U-turn trying to take of this very system of ATP to gain personal advantage. I have issues when players complain to the tournament organizer for a shabby scheduling, poor backup plans in case of rain delays and tournaments extending more that the original schedule, and hence resulting in injuries or other health issues to players but are okay if the prize money in increased. How does increasing the prize money compensate it?

Murray has done all of these things in the recent times. If he is being criticized for this, then this criticism is valid.

In fairness though raiders, this was the one rare time that Murray was the biggest name of a tournament, never again may we have to say such crass things Now Murray can always brag, "i was once ranked number one for Bangkok!" Not sure anyone will have a clue what he's talking about mind

Again ROTLA you are going way off topic yet again.

I have a problem with posters like you that have double standards in moaning about one player saying and doing one thing and others doing the same doesn't get a mention. No surprise there.

Most of the players (not just Murray) have moaned about the ATP schedule and the mandatory tournaments they have to play. So let me simplify this for you Andymoaner.

Players have to play 8 1000 masters events and 4 500 events. From a geographical standpoint they have a valid complaint. The schedule can be crazy given that the events are packed together. The US Open was shambolic and the organizers were pathetic! They had indoor courts that should've been used and wasn't. Poor planning and poor execution.

The Australian Open has no Masters 500 or 1000 events before it. For me the simple solution is to move the Australian Open to February and move a 1000 event to January like the Shanghai masters. That makes more sense. But as we all know the ATP or the ITF do not do sensible. There are no 1000 Master events on grass. Again this needs to change, but won't. Where is the logic going to Shanghai and then Paris? To me that is clocking up un-necessary air milage. You then have the Miami Masters and Indian Wells after the Australian Open. Again that makes no sense given that After the French Open and Wimbledon there are no such events on the surface they play on.

To your point regarding Murray's prinicples in playing more events given his view on the current schedule, in a way can be viewed as contradictory, but it doesn't requrie a non-sensical rant and pointless article.

legendkillar wrote:It is very interesting to see that despite the lack of activity within the tennis world in terms of events, still we find the Andymoaner brigade out in force.

I would like to point out a few things:

1) What is the point of this thread when the OP wants to moan and disagree with what posters have pointed out?

2) I cannot see how 'contract incentivisation' would influence Murray's quest for a higer ranking. Maybe meeting Nadal in semi's at GS and Master events may have something to do with this.

3) What does the strike talk and Murray's 'behaviour on court' go to with this thread?

utter crap this article

Thanks for that LegendKiller....absolute truth and hilarious too, made me laugh.

Mention Murray round here is like showing a match to a tinder box, only needs some bright spark to set it all off.

Can't believe how much brown stuff is being forced down Andy Murray's throat every time he opens his mouth.

Thank heavens articles like this will disappear into the bowels of V2 and fester to their hearts content there, never to be seen again.

And Murray, well he'll just keep playing tennis, rake in the serious accolades and pay off his mortgage like yesterday, whatever we think of him, there are enough supports who like to watch his tennis, in enough numbers for event organisers to pay him handsomely enough to play tennis at their event.

simples

Josiah.....

"Now Murray can always brag, "i was once ranked number one for Bangkok!" Not sure anyone will have a clue what he's talking about mind"

Amazing that you can fabricate Murray saying something, then bash him for it.

Do "you" know what you are talking about ????

Jubbahey wrote:
Amazing that you can fabricate Murray saying something, then bash him for it.

It's actually quite bizarre

Murray has improved this year, having made the semis at Roland Garros, Rome and Monte Carlo, but sadly he crashed out in the Round of 16 in Madrid. In real terms he is definetly up there after a solid season at the big tournaments, but he cannot be considered anything other than maybe a Top 10 player. He is no Almagro though, for sure.