Well Done Andy

Andy Murray, on sealing the Shanghai Masters and winning his third ATP title in as many weeks. That win means that, for the first time in his career, he moves above the legendary Roger Federer in the rankings moving to No.3 in the world and well-deserved it is too. Well deserved I hear some ask? Well rankings are judged on the here and now form not what has gone before from a year or two ago etc. Now on this season alone Andy has a better slam record than admittedly a Federer in decline and a better record in all other tournaments having won five titles to Federer's one so no contest there.

What difference will being No.3 make to Andy's game/mindset? Not a lot in the grand scheme of things but obviously it is a nice feather in his cap and can only boost his own confidence that he is heading in the right direction. I often hear people say that Murray should not be included in the big top four that is often mentioned perhaps solely because he has yet to win a slam which I can understand but equally it is unfair to try to paint him as being in the chasing pack as he has long been ahead of that chasing pack of players such as Ferrer, Soderling, Tsonga etc since breaking into the top four in 2008.

What does the future hold for Andy Murray in terms of grand slams? Well he may win one or he may not and that will depend a lot on what happens with those around him such as Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Now Federer is on the wain so he is much in Murray's boat where he may have to depend on others slipping up to benefit unless like Murray he can raise his slam game to another level that he isn't at at the moment. Nadal is going through something of a crisis of confidence himself of late so he isn't as bullet-proof as say a year or two ago. Djokovic has been imperious this season and the question will be:- Can he maintain that level and consistency? If not others will pounce.

Again well done Andy on winning your 21st title and 8th Masters title taking him up to joint 6th on the all-time list of most successful players Masters Series in history.

well done Andy! winning can become such a habit can't it? He didn't play that well (at least compared to how he's been playing the past three weeks) and IMO this is the sort of match he could have got frustrated and could well have lost a few months ago, but now he's finding ways to win them.

World n°3

Glad to see Murray defend his title.

It was an amazing first game, and then a good solid match. It was great to see Murray mix it up and remain aggressive, and delighted that he managed to defend his title. Well done for progressing to No 3 ahead of TMF, should be able to finish the year on this ranking I would think.

Wasn't the guy presenting the trophies hysterical - Mr Mooray

Very happy with result, but can never prevent myself from feeling slightly gutted for Ferrer, he is such a gallant fighter.

If Andy can just get that second serve percentage up from the 40% mark, the whole world could be his oyster.

Good match, enjoyed the ralleys and both guys made for some nice moments.
Ferrer didnt do himself full justice with poor 1st serve % and the way he folded at 6-5 in the 1st set. He's never quite strong enough at the highest level, hence the fact he's never won a Masters event.

Well done on becoming #3 Andy!

Congrats on being world #3 Andy.

Well done, indeed.

He should now be targeting number 2 (a position he has held before, briefly).

Well done Andy - still keeping GB on the World tennis Map

Congrats Andy. Now it s time to turn your masters win to slams wins.
So it is not the case of last man standing as Andy too have played same no of tournaments as other top 3.

Nadal will be back during clay season Andy might get a shot at no. 2 ranking if Nadal tanks at Aussie open.

This has been a good patch for Andy, losing only one match since Wimbledon.

Worried about Soderling as he has withdrawn from 2 more tournaments.

Good to see 606v2 members not leaving the forum

Nice post, Craig.

Well done, Andy!

What a difference a year makes.....well, 3 months then.

Andy has been playing some brilliant tennis lately and its good to see him upbeat about his tennis right now.

Nice post CC.
Congrats to Andy, it has been a good year so far for him and long may it continue. As you say the slam may or may not come who knows. this time last year I don't think there were many who would have seen Djokovic doing what he did in 2011. 2012 is already shaping up to be a very interesting year.

Looking at snatches of the matches over the Asian swing, it's clear that Andy M has been getting far shoulder and oomph into his forehand. This, together with excellent serving, is making him far more aggressive and so much harder to beat.
I recall that very fine match between Andy and Rafa at the 02 last year when a little more aggression on key points would have led to Murray winning that match. We've all been badgering him to attack more. Seems the message is finally getting through, or is it down - at Shanghai - to lighter balls and a faster court ?

wow - but murray has 1200points to defend from aus and rafa only 360 i dont think murray willlllllllll get to no2 unless he finally breaks his slam duck!

Murray is certainly in much better form, and seeing as Roger hasn't gotten a title since winning Doha in Jan, can't have any complaints with the ranking. In a way, i'd be happy if Roger was overtaken by no-weapons Ferrer as it would mean more for him if he manages to win a major again..

He needs to win a slam(or 2) in 2012.

He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

You do not consider the current world #2 - Nadal - a 'main' player, who played in both Tokyo and Shanghai.

The players missing during the Asian swing (from the current Top 10) are #1, Djokovic, #4, Federer, and #6, Soderling, #10, Monfils.

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

Federer must be fit to burst with energy, he's been saving it up since January...

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

Federer must be fit to burst with energy, he's been saving it up since January...

Not really. - http://www.glueckspost.ch/sites/glueckspost.ch/files/Federer_2.jpg

laverfan wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

Federer must be fit to burst with energy, he's been saving it up since January...

Not really. - http://www.glueckspost.ch/sites/glueckspost.ch/files/Federer_2.jpg

A good point LF. Dads and trophies have historically been a bit like oil and water. Murray should steer clear if Kim gets broody any time soon.

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

I some how doubt that Energy and Saving ever in today's climate can form in the same sentence.

Positively 4th Street wrote:Dads and trophies have historically been a bit like oil and water. Murray should steer clear if Kim gets broody any time soon.

Would like Andy to win a couple of slams, before he starts a family like Federer.

laverfan wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:He's only winning these titles because the main players are saving their energy for the slams next year.

You do not consider the current world #2 - Nadal - a 'main' player, who played in both Tokyo and Shanghai.

The players missing during the Asian swing (from the current Top 10) are #1, Djokovic, #4, Federer, and #6, Soderling, #10, Monfils.

It doesn't matter whether Nadal is taking part in the tournaments that Andy's winning. Fact is Nadal and co and not going at full kilter in these last few tournaments whereas Andrew Murray is.

So Murray is only winnng because nobody else is trying?

Super D Boon wrote:It doesn't matter whether Nadal is taking part in the tournaments that Andy's winning. Fact is Nadal and co and not going at full kilter in these last few tournaments whereas Andrew Murray is.

So #5 Ferrer (Shanghai), #7 Berdych (Beijing), #8 Fish (Canada, LA and Atlanta) and #9 Tsonga (Metz and Queens) are considered lesser competition?

Will Nadal and company go 'full kilter' in Paris and WTF?

laverfan wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:It doesn't matter whether Nadal is taking part in the tournaments that Andy's winning. Fact is Nadal and co and not going at full kilter in these last few tournaments whereas Andrew Murray is.

So #5 Ferrer (Shanghai), #7 Berdych (Beijing), #8 Fish (Canada, LA and Atlanta) and #9 Tsonga (Metz and Queens) are considered lesser competition?

Will Nadal and company go 'full kilter' in Paris and WTF?

It is a poor attempt at wumming.

They aren't trying

That explains why Federer isn't winning any Silverware this year and Nadal can't beat Djokovic

Murray has always been more suited to bo3, never bo5 player in any era. However, his serving stats are getting better as are his body language. Still there is one thing keeping cool in half empty Shanghai and doing it in tempestuous Tour Finals at the o2.

Hmm not a bo5 player in any era?? How curious?

In best of five tournaments he has by far the best record of any player outwith Federer, Nadal and Djokovoic so that is impressive best of five stat in itself and so I'd say that would put him in very good stead in any era.

I'd give up now CC .

The ABM crowd are in full voice !

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Murray has always been more suited to bo3, never bo5 player in any era.

Murray has a 12/5 five-set record. (70%+ - currently #9 in active players).

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4899272&postcount=214

legendkillar wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:It doesn't matter whether Nadal is taking part in the tournaments that Andy's winning. Fact is Nadal and co and not going at full kilter in these last few tournaments whereas Andrew Murray is.

So #5 Ferrer (Shanghai), #7 Berdych (Beijing), #8 Fish (Canada, LA and Atlanta) and #9 Tsonga (Metz and Queens) are considered lesser competition?

Will Nadal and company go 'full kilter' in Paris and WTF?

It is a poor attempt at wumming.

No it isn't Just because you can't handle facts! Murray wins places like Cincinnati when the other players are keepinjg themselves for the Olympics for example. Nadal went on to win Gold. He wins Cincinnati against Djokovic (shoulder) but it's the latter who wins the US Open this year. The fact Murray does well outside of the slams in tournaments where the usual suspects are taking it easy is an observation not a "WUM" attempt. The big players are "trying" but in a long, long season they don't try as hard as they do in the events that matter the most.

Ooooh so lets see? They don't try at Cincinatti as they are saving themselves for a tournament a year in the future. Andd pray tell if, as you claim, that Nadal, Fed and Djoko don't try at these Masters events why then has Nadal won the most ever (19), Federer (17) and Djokovic (10)? Very clear to see what your agenda is.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Ooooh so lets see? They don't try at Cincinatti as they are saving themselves for a tournament a year in the future. Andd pray tell if, as you claim, that Nadal, Fed and Djoko don't try at these Masters events why then has Nadal won the most ever (19), Federer (17) and Djokovic (10)? Very clear to see what your agenda is.

And it's clear to see yours. How comes Murray hasn't won a slam yet, but still manages to turn over the best players in the smaller events? Facts are, Murray isn't quite good enough to beat the biggest names on the biggest stages. Henman had a 4-0 record against Ivanisevic going into Wimbledon semis 2001 and yet the biggest match he plays aginst him he loses. World of difference between beating Djoko in Cincinnati than it is beating him at the US Open. It is what it is.

Not a matter of those players not trying as you claim though otherwise they'd all have won virtually none Masters events so you'll need to do better than that.

As for why he hasn't win a Slam event yet? Three reasons:-

Roger Federer (Seen by many as the greatest of all-time)

Rafael Nadal (Was tipped to surpass Federer and is surely the greatest clay courter of all-time)

Novak Djokovic (Unbeatable well virtually this year and who knows how great a player he'll end up)

Those players are of a supremely high standard and Andy just needs to keep hammering on the door as he has and who knows?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Not a matter of those players not trying as you claim though otherwise they'd all have won virtually none Masters events so you'll need to do better than that.

As for why he hasn't win a Slam event yet? Three reasons:-

Roger Federer (Seen by many as the greatest of all-time)

Rafael Nadal (Was tipped to surpass Federer and is surely the greatest clay courter of all-time)

Novak Djokovic (Unbeatable well virtually this year and who knows how great a player he'll end up)

Those players are of a supremely high standard and Andy just needs to keep hammering on the door as he has and who knows?

Trying to say I said something that I didn't is not going to win me around. I said "try harder" not "not try". The others have all won numerous masters events yes but to say they go full out in every one of the 18/19 tournaments they have to play per year is a bit fanciful. I just think Murray capitalises when they take a breather so to speak. The big three seem to go up a level whereas his level stays as it is when it comes to the majors. I've no agenda against Murray as it's no odds to me if he wins a slam or not. However, there will always be great players so just because those three are around don't mean to say Murray wins a slam if they all become injured.

I remember it well, the Henman apologists saying if it weren't for Sampras the greatest ever Henman would have won Wimbledon. When Sampras went downhill and started to bomb at Wimbledon Timbo still couldn't win it.

Andy Murray's slam final defeats have come against Federer (twice) and Djokovic (once). Players ranked higher than him so no disgrace there. I won't get into a strong/weak era debate with you and lets be fair Henman (a top player) was not in the same class as Murray (by his own admission) so it is not a good comparison. Henman's big chance was against an over-the-hill Ivansivic and still blew it and that was a mere semi not a final so every chance he would have lost the final as well.

Andy Murray is a consistent semi-finalist and triple slam finalist yet as I've said before there is still room for improvement in his game ie second serve and more sustained aggression during matches. I'd be far more concerned if he wasn't getting to the business end of slams or if in his slam finals he had lost to a player ranked well below him (a la Ivanisevic V Henman but that hasn't happened).

Andy may win a slam or he may not but I would love for you to produce a list of better players never to have won a slam that can rival Andy's impressive slam record and Masters titles won etc.

To be fair there aren't many better players to have NOT won a slam. You could add Brian Gottfried or another Dutch player (forget his name) who won 25 tournaments each but no slam. My only point is Murray seems to do well when the biggest names ease off a little and to beat Nadal/Federer/Djokovic over 5 sets in a slam rather than over three sets in a non-slam is a totally different proposition.

Or provide me a link where players said 'oh well you know I didn't try hard today'

Gottfried doesn't even come close. He won 25 titles (but do you say only because Borg, McEnroe and Connors weren't trying) whilst Andy is not even halfway through his career and already has 21 titles. Gottfried had one slam final (lost French Open 6-0 6-3 6-0 to Guillermo Villas) whilst Murray already has three slam finals. As for slam semis I am pretty sure Gottfried has nowhere near as many as Andy has tallied up already.

Wow 8 Masters Titles.

Super D Boon,

Zero slams so far. So? Considering he is British and the best player from these shores for seventy odd years and is:-

A triple slam finalist.

Five times slam semi-finalist.

One of only a handful of players in tennis history to reach all four slam semis (or better) in a calendar year.

One of only a handful of players to have reached all four slam semis.

Inside the top ten most successful Masters Cup players of all-time.

No.3 ranked in the world.

I'd say there is plenty to be mighty proud about already and guess what? He ain't finished yet.

Y I Man wrote:Removed some posts, stop the bickering please.

I agree Y I that crowd is getting out of control.
We badly need Nole supporters here.

I wouldn't call it bickering. Someone stating 'facts' should provide them if asked. Don't see the harm.

It is frustrating to be honest to see the tennis thread treated as dumping ground for posters to crap on when they get peed off that their favourite team/player lost or something and try to antagonise posters here.

A good verbal kicking never hurt anyone.

legendkillar wrote:I wouldn't call it bickering. Someone stating 'facts' should provide them if asked. Don't see the harm.

It is frustrating to be honest to see the tennis thread treated as dumping ground for posters to crap on when they get peed off that their favourite team/player lost or something and try to antagonise posters here.

A good verbal kicking never hurt anyone.

Bad turn of phrase by me.
I meant to stop the insulting comments at eachother.