How has this happened?

First topic message reminder :

In 2009, 22 year old Andy Murray beat 28 year old Roger Federer in Indian Wells to open up a 6-2 head to head lead.
In 2014 33 year old Federer beat 27 year old Murray to square the head to head up at 11 each.

How does that happen? Since when does it work that way round? Isn't the older guy supposed to beat the novice up, but then be overhauled as he declines and the younger guy improves? The Slam records of the two clearly shows that Federers powers have waned in that time, and Murray has strengthened, making numerous finals and winning two. The same goes for their ranking. In 2009 Federer recaptured the #1 ranking, but is only recently recovering from dropping to #7. Murray admittedly is down right now, but that's mainly due to missed events last year.

So what's happened in the game of these two to turn the match up the other way round?

Edit: corrected date of Fed getting back to #1

invisiblecoolers wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:I agree with you Craig that his physical state isn't a problem. I think he does suffer from not being as mentally tough as the other 3 members of the now defunct 'big four'. Lendl filled a gap there big time.

But he also got him playing on the front foot. Gone were the mid court nothing forehands. Gone was the default position of 2 metres behind the baseline.

You might be right, a few good wins might bring some of those good habits back. I personally worry, I think he was dragged kicking and screaming into a more aggressive game, and he might want to revert to his reactive roots.

Also, in ten years I've never questioned his desire but I find myself doing that now. As Micky says in Rocky 3 'you ain't been hungry since you won that belt' and I wonder if his belly is full after Wimbledon.

Time will tell, and I hope my fears are wrong. But unless he plays as pro actively as Lendl made him play, I'm 100% sure he won't win another slam.

You and Craig might agree, but certainly not Murray, he felt to take down Rafa he needs more fitness and stamina and he thought he could achieve that without compromise of his skills, and it looked for a breif period from 2012 Olympics to 2013 Wimbledon.

Like I said ic it makes no difference if he done getting overly physical (can you be such a thing today anyway) as Murray's problems lie (for me) deeper within his head and his soul just now and nothing to do with how physically strong he is. Look at his last four tournament exits to see what I am getting at. All tame defeats in the end (one of which when he should have been closing a match out and didn't V Tsonga and the other V Federer when he should have levelled the match and didn't with the other two very tame defeats at the business end of slams). That is the worrying thing here and points to lack of mental sharpness, inconsistencies in his play and as Henman Bill alluded to and I worryingly have to agree about a seemingly lack of hunger.

Actually Craig I am not arguing with u here as your point seems to be right for me as well, all I am saying is Murray doesnt think that way n he primarily focussed on fitness to overcome other issues if he changes his belief well n good then if not we might see the struggle continue.

But this is where we disagree. Changing one's style and thought patterns are virtually impossible to do. Murray by nature is the way that he is and I don't think anything will change that style. He has won a couple of slams and Olympic Gold so he may yet add to that tally but he has to rediscover form and consistency and belief. Fundamentally those are the issues here. Sure a lot else needs addressing IE second serve and aggression but that will only come with self-confidence.

my point is he is a counter-puncher by nature much like say Ali and you couldn't teach him a Tysonesque knockout blow but he used his strengths to the Max as Andy must.

Look at the ATP match facts listings IC re: Murray's position for 1st & 2nd serve pts won.

Career 1st serve points won:
Murray 57th
Djokovic 78th

Career 2nd serve points won:
Murray 49th
Edberg 55th

How about giving Murray a little more respect for his achievements?

I do find it amusing that on second serve points won Murray is only 1% behind Tsonga and Sampras. Effectively, he probably loses 1 second serve point more than them on average every 2 or 3 matches!

Clearly, he has never been a serve orientated player. I agree he is now stuck with a largely effective but not great first serve. However, I remain convinced that the second serve could be improved through a mental shift more than anything else.

My view on this is that his 2nd serve is getting weaker not stronger...why? Because the guys are now actually attacking it more and Murray knows this so it becomes a vicious mental cycle. However, as long as he gets it in he can back it up fantastically well due to his movement and ground game, plus if he serves up over 60% 1st serves he's less exposed anyway given the 1st serve is so powerful.

We know it's not all about power on 2nd, Nadal is all time #1 for 2nd serve points won. Murray can improve it for sure, but needs to make the prep & movement between 1st and 2nd less different to preserve his back more in my opinion.

I got round to watching the Murray and Federer match last night after taping it.

How has it happened? Well Federer showed some good form, but I don't think it was anything like his best or past best either. Andy mentally succumbed to losing and it is something he has always been accustomed to when going out of his way to lose a match in that fashion.

In previous matches Federer I think for sure just frustrated himself out of matches against Murray. Andy threw in varied junk and instead of playing each ball on merit, I think he played with frustration and tried to whack the fluff off the ball. That in turn drew errors and Andy picked him off. That was the basis of Andy's success against Federer. Now I feel Federer has reigned himself in a bit and I feel is playing smarter not out of choice, but because he has to when factoring his age and stamina.

Like I have said many a time, Andy's real lack of variety is killing his game. There is no disputing that Lendl turned Murray into a machine and it worked wonders. That track however was always only going to go in one direction. It was never going to evolve. It didn't surprise me that Andy and Lendl parted ways. Andy needed to develop more and really that was never gong to happen under Lendl and I am still torn whether this will happen under Mauresmo.

Andy's serving is never going to change. The 2nd serve will be powderpuff, I actually think Andy has improved the second serve. Not in the speed stakes granted, but I think he has better placement of it then he used to.

I really do wish that Andy would look to the past and embrace that variation again. Whether it will be too late now, I am not sure. Andy needs to look at that guy who beat him at Queens. Stepanek now tries to out fox opponents in a bid to remain competitive. I think Andy needs to do the same. The problem with his game at the moment is that there is no protection from purple patch big hitters, the road runners or all game players.

Andy is seen to be proactive. I feel that rather than doing something, Andy is doing nothing and that can be attributed to his current slump.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I got round to watching the Murray and Federer match last night after taping it.

Very retro!

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I got round to watching the Murray and Federer match last night after taping it.

Very retro!

Well Sky + in accient speak

Federer has become much more aggressive over the past five years, especially this year under Edberg's tutelage.

Murray has lost variety (due to bulking up and latterly Lendl), game management and will-to-win (since the back op).

Although he has won his slams in the past couple of years he has also become much less consistent generally on tour. In 08-11 he was regularly in contention for all the big hard-court Masters tournaments, winning eight titles in that time; from 12-present he has won one Masters tournament in all. It may be slightly bizarre to argue in some ways he has declined during his grand slam winning period, but I think it may be the case!

Well hopefully he reads this thread and listens to the sage advice. He needs to

- reintroduce variation
- play the point the way the opponent doesn't like it (something I've heard Federer say he thinks about) rather than a single style
- get and stay fit, but accept that extra-extra-extra fitness is wasted time, unless he's switching to some Iron Man competition (not the one with repulsor rays and a red / yellow colour scheme).

if a batsman is allowed a runner in cricket, tennis should allow a proxy second server, and Murray will be fine.

coolpixel wrote:if a batsman is allowed a runner in cricket, tennis should allow a proxy second server, and Murray will be fine.

Best suggestion of the tennis forum this year, DV will recommend you to ATP for sucha great analysis and recommendations.

bogbrush wrote:Well hopefully he reads this thread and listens to the sage advice. He needs to

- reintroduce variation
- play the point the way the opponent doesn't like it (something I've heard Federer say he thinks about) rather than a single style
- get and stay fit, but accept that extra-extra-extra fitness is wasted time, unless he's switching to some Iron Man competition (not the one with repulsor rays and a red / yellow colour scheme).

Spot on. Add to that grow some more cojones on 2nd serve and we've done Mauresmo's job for her!

spdocoffee wrote:Federer has become much more aggressive over the past five years, especially this year under Edberg's tutelage.

Murray has lost variety (due to bulking up and latterly Lendl), game management and will-to-win (since the back op).

Although he has won his slams in the past couple of years he has also become much less consistent generally on tour. In 08-11 he was regularly in contention for all the big hard-court Masters tournaments, winning eight titles in that time; from 12-present he has won one Masters tournament in all. It may be slightly bizarre to argue in some ways he has declined during his grand slam winning period, but I think it may be the case!

Yeah it is weird because I feel he went generally backwards under Lendl bar he started to play better in slam SF and finals. His forehand improved but every other aspect of his game got worse. How much of that was due to the fact he seems to have been managing a back issue for most of 12-13 is a matter for debate.

BS - I think under Lendl he focussed more on the big events. His forehand improved greatly, but so did his first shot after serve. Way more aggressive. He won more 1-2 points than ever before. He protected his second serve better too. Not sure why that's regressed again now, but I'm sure his second serve stats will be better with Lendl than before of after.

His backhand definitely went backwards though. He essentially lost the BHDTL, which must be back related.

Hey? How is hitting a BHDTL different to hitting a BHCC back wise...if anything hitting CC uses your back more.

It's nothing to do with this back, it's his brain. Hitting good 2nd serves and BHDTLs both require mental fortitude...that's his main problem right now.

To be fair, his backhand generally looked painful over the last couple of years. He pulled a lot of regulation cross-court ones into the net.

lydian wrote:Hey? How is hitting a BHDTL different to hitting a BHCC back wise...if anything hitting CC uses your back more.

It's nothing to do with this back, it's his brain. Hitting good 2nd serves and BHDTLs both require mental fortitude...that's his main problem right now.

I would agree with this. As I said elsewhere Murray when mentally down or low on confidence his performance level drops sharper than the likes of Roger, Novak and Rafa when they are out of sorts.

Murray said himself that the extra rotation required for BHDTL meant he basically stopped hitting it for a period because it hurt his back too much.

His words, not mine.

I'm no expert but I'd have thought changing the direction of the ball requires something extra over sending it back - the thing can get side spin and go wide unless you're all over it.  Most balls to the backhand will be coming crosscourt.

Also, it's got to be more of a killer or you're feeding somebodies forehand most of the time. That, and it's the high part of the net so it's going to have to be played precisely all sound like you have to be tip top to do it properly.

BH DTL is a less natural, easy shot that requires at the very least tweak's to natural body position and stance, I am not surprised if it causes more physical strain in the long run. It feels more difficulty technically to achieve. Also, from a point of simple physics, if you are hitting a low ball, perhaps an incoming slice, and you have a choice of getting it up over a higher, nearer target or a further away, lower target...

Still, you ought to throw in a few occassionally. Cross court to cross court backhand rallies can be really boring an predictable. It's the kind of thing that incessantly occurs in matches between mid ranked players that make me want to reach for the remote control.

Interesting comments from Lydian on serve. Even at the level of club play or even a junior difference between first and second serves is one of the marks of a beginner. It can go one of two ways at that level. There is the kid that has exactly the same first serve and second serve. Tends to hit a lot of them long. Then at the opposite extreme you have the person that bullets their first serve at 90mph, but gets about 20-30% of them in, and then just taps every second serve down the middle of the service box, and it can be returned from standing on the service line. Murray reminds me of such a player!

Speaking exclusively to the Guardian, Murray said of Mauresmo’s tennis philosophy in comparison with that of Lendl: “It’s similar in a lot of ways, in terms of trying to be aggressive, trying to move forward, get up to the net when you can. [But] the other thing is variety. That was something that maybe Ivan wasn’t that big on.

“He was very big on being aggressive and coming forward to finish points but Amélie played with a lot of variety herself. It worked well for her and, when it’s used properly, it can make a big difference.

“It’s been a big part of my game since I was young. I played like that when I was a kid and I did it as well when I came on to the Tour until I was 21, 22. But when I was starting to play winning tennis, high-percentage solid tennis, not making many mistakes, moving well, maybe I just got away from using that flair. That’s something I wanted to get back to and try to use in matches.”

Interesting.

"in terms of trying to be aggressive, trying to move forward, get up to the net when you can"

I didn't see that v Tsonga, Sousa or Federer.

Danny_1982 wrote:Speaking exclusively to the Guardian, Murray said of Mauresmo’s tennis philosophy in comparison with that of Lendl: “It’s similar in a lot of ways, in terms of trying to be aggressive, trying to move forward, get up to the net when you can. [But] the other thing is variety. That was something that maybe Ivan wasn’t that big on.

“He was very big on being aggressive and coming forward to finish points but Amélie played with a lot of variety herself. It worked well for her and, when it’s used properly, it can make a big difference.

“It’s been a big part of my game since I was young. I played like that when I was a kid and I did it as well when I came on to the Tour until I was 21, 22. But when I was starting to play winning tennis, high-percentage solid tennis, not making many mistakes, moving well, maybe I just got away from using that flair. That’s something I wanted to get back to and try to use in matches.”

Interesting.

Great find Danny.

There's a few of us on here can take a bow.

Tennisfan wrote:Career 1st serve points won:
Murray 57th
Djokovic 78th

Career 2nd serve points won:
Murray 49th
Edberg 55th

How about giving Murray a little more respect for his achievements?

Thats says stats don't say the actual story.

Edberg is widely considered as one of the greatest servers and specially serve and volley.

lydian wrote:Look at the ATP match facts listings IC re: Murray's position for 1st & 2nd serve pts won.

1st and 2nd serve points won doesn't mean he is the best server, he could win a point inspite of serving poor coz of other skills, and we all know how skillful Murray is so points won doesn't mean he is a very good server.v  

I don't think anyone is arguing that his game had more variety when he was younger but if he were to go down that route would it rectify things alone? I say most definitely not. First and foremost he needs to get in a better mental state of mind and regain the knack of finishing matches off and battling to the end. His mind and spirit needs mended first for me.

If he were to do that then you have to ask is variety the route to go down fully? I have my doubts as it bore no fruit to speak of slam-winning wise. Remember he was readily panned in those days for over using drop shots (we hardly see them now sadly) and people suggested he needed more aggression.

I really am not sure where Andy goes from here but I know he mentally needs to improve, become more battle-hardened again and then from there he may be able to implement changes to his game. In his current form and mindset I don't think it is wise to look to change things. I mean if results don't come he may be inclined to think that is not the way to go when mentally it is that side that will not bring results. If you see what I mean.   

Thank you Andy for admitting what some of us knew on here all along.

CC, with respect you're missing the point, and the bigger picture.

Murray achieved success through a more limited game...but it wasn't HIS game. It was Lendl's. Essentially, he wasn't being himself on court, he'd abandoned his tennis DNA.

And a player with such variety can only play in a way he knows is limited for so long until his heart isn't in using that way anymore. He becomes mentally dull and starts to lose the fire in his belly. He'd simply reached the end of the mental line with Lendl. This is where Murray got to pre-Wimbledon this year, he realised like some of us on here that for the sheer enjoyment of picking up a racquet he needed to revert back to the tennis DNA that made him love the game and be successful to start with...to once again play tennis on his own terms.

By reverting back to his (DN)A game, he'll find renewed enjoyment at playing the way he wants to play, so he'll become mentally sharper and tougher because it will all feel so much more natural to him. This is why he's appointed Mauresmo...she's taking him back to the future so he can rediscover what made him successful in the first place.

Yes I see what you are saying lydian but my point is that now, mentally and confidence-wise, is it the time to make wholesale changes? He is listless like a ship without a rudder at the moment and taking onboard water as well. First he needs to plug those gaps by rediscovering the knack of closing out matches with improved consistency and results should come and confidence will return. At that moment in time, I feel, is the time to make changes. If he tries (or going by what he is quoted as saying is trying them now) then surely his losses which I put down to poor mindset and application he could confuse with that return to variety not to be working when in all reality it won't work until his mindset improves.

CaledonianCraig wrote:He is listless like a ship without a rudder at the moment and taking onboard water as well.

Exactly! Can't you see he's been losing his tennis raison d'être? He's listless because the rudder has been set in 1 direction for too long. Going in 1 direction isn't his DNA. He has to play how he wants to play or he'll just drop out of tennis. He's got the slams...so it's time to enjoy the game a bit now, play on his terms and that ironically will make him more successful. A leopard can't, and shouldn't, change its spots. He did and started to pay the longer term price. He's not Nadal, so why try to be him...

CaledonianCraig wrote:First he needs to plug those gaps by rediscovering the knack of closing out matches with improved consistency and results should come and confidence will return.

No. First he needs to rediscover his love of the game. The love of HIS varied game. The rest will follow.

CaledonianCraig wrote:If he tries (or going by what he is quoted as saying is trying them now) then surely his losses which I put down to poor mindset and application he could confuse with that return to variety not to be working when in all reality it won't work until his mindset improves.

If he doesn't make these changes then it will only get worse as his motivation wanes further. If you're a fan of the guy then you'll want him to enjoy his tennis and play the way he wants to play...the way that actually brought him into the top 5 in the first place and bamboozled guys like Federer. In recent times Federer is 6-2 up because he sussed Lendl-Limited Murray out.

It's like the classic paper/scissors/rock game. When Murray came on tour he was scissors to everyone's paper, even Federer's origami paper, slashing their games up with all different directions of cuts. Then he decided to become the rock instead...which Federer, and others, have more latterly started to re-wrap in paper. Especially Federer with his rejuvenated love of origami. Murray has finally realised he's got stuck between a 'rock' and a tennis hard place so needs to revert back, sharpen his teeth and get those scissors out again! Sure, Nadal and Djokovic will always be rocks to his scissors by and large but he can be more successful in general by just being himself again. I, for one, will enjoy watching him play again if Murray Scissor-Hands makes a reappearance...

Of course lydian I do see what you are saying and do get the impression watching Andy of late that his mind and heart is somewhere else. What the solution is I really don't know but mentally he needs to refocus and become tougher to beat and get that tenacity and hunger back. Sure get the variety back but he needs the aggression as well and lose the passiveness as it does him no favours whatsoever. We will see what the coming months bring but I really do think Andy is on the precipice at the moment and the fall will take him to oblivion if he doesn't choose the right direction for his tennis and strategy but that fall will happen if he doesn't rediscover his zest, hunger and heart.

You could well be right CC. I do fully accept that it was the manner of recent losses that leads you to question so many things about his game & mindset right now.

But there's also a big part of me thinking that before getting too concerned, it's worth waiting to see if he can get through the first week of the USO (which I believe he will) and reserving judgement based on what happens from there.

lags72 wrote:You could well be right CC. I do fully accept that it was the manner of recent losses that leads you to question so many things about his game & mindset right now.

But there's also a big part of me thinking that before getting too concerned, it's worth waiting to see if he can get through the first week of the USO (which I believe he will) and reserving judgement based on what happens from there.

Yes lags I hold out hope but my observations and concerns stem from a prolonged spell of bad form/mindset and lack of hunger for a fight that I can honestly say that has not lasted this long before at any time in his career. It is over a year since his last tournament win and his last four exits have come in either tame or lack of ruthlessness circumstances which are not Andy-like.

Going back to the original post on this thread. In 2008 a 26/27 year old Federer was going through a bad spell in his career. Accepted that there were some reasons behind this but quoting from another thread 'as Jimmy Connors always said (no injury 'justifications' or coulda/shoulda/woulda from him!!) - and as repeated by many lesser mortals ever since - once you choose to step on to court, you've declared yourself fit to go, and to face whatever comes your way'.
At present a 26/27 year old (Murray) is going through a similar bad spell in his career (Federer's results wise was much less poor but given his previous dominance just as disheartening). The recovery from back surgery and then the unexpected split with Lendl definitely seem to have taken their toll. Again the quote above stands so no excuses.

Although not achieving the levels of dominance he had previously Federer recovered and has had a very good career since. As the years have gone by he has adapted his game to negate his opponents strengths, and to meet the limitations that getting older places on him physically. This seems to give him the confidence which is evident in his game at present.

As per previous posters comments Murray seems lost at the moment. I thought that the battling win against Isner might have been a turn around point but the manner of his subsequent loss to Federer knocked that on the head. Pretty sure it's the first time I've heard him say in his press conference 'I blew it'. Yes there are probably a lot of things he could change or get better at in his game but I think the main issue is confidence. When things are going well he is playing fine but a couple of mistakes or his opponent playing some good games just seem to deflate him and it's match over. Not sure what is going to happen but hopefully like Federer he can get back to somewhere near his best and start competing again.

Yes Calder I can see what you are saying but would point out this. Roger Federer is far better equipped mentally to deal with setbacks/losses of form as he is better grounded than Murray. Andy gets down on himself very easily and his mood swings even are evident in just single matches whereas Roger sticks at one level with few downs and more ups. Also Andy needs more wins to boost his confidence and self-belief. For example Roger harnasses more from his wins mentally than Andy does. Andy has always been this way hence it took him so long to truly believe he could win a slam.

No issues with that Craig. Better put than me. Again as has been said before it's not the losses to the likes of Federer, Nadal, Dimitrov and Tsonga that are the worry. It's the manner of the losses. Complete capitulations to Nadal and Dimitrov and then blow ups against Federer and Tsonga (no guarantee he would beaten Federer if he had won the 2nd set but should never have lost it from 2 breaks up). Don't think these losses are a result of wrong style of play or bad tactics but more self-belief. He could lost any of these matches anyway but the way he lost them is a concern.

Mental issues don't just spring up and get stamped down. They arise from actual problems.

Rafa had mental problems with Djokovic so he changed his game. He didn't sit there saying "I must be mentally tough" he decided to go for different parts of the court, and in doing so recaptured done confidence.

Murray can only regain concentration etc by believing in his game BY CHANGING HIS GAME.

Belief is the problem here though BB. Murray has never been blessed with vast quantities of belief even when in good form. It took him so long to realise he had what it takes to win a slam but I fear a lot of that has now washed away. He could try whatever tactics he wants but right now the belief isn't there to reap the rewards of tactic change if you see what I mean.

Agree with that Craig. As I said previously there are probably a number of things he could improve on or change which may help his results. Prior to this year the only player who really had a stranglehold over Murray was Nadal (he still has). Even with Djokovic most matches after AO 2011 were close run affairs with Murray winning some of the bigger ones. So the game he was playing was not far away. Lendl seemed to bring the belief that was missing which resulted in him winning his slams during a period when he was in his own words suffering from back issues. That belief currently seems to have gone. Changing his game may help (all things move forward) but I don't see this as the primary fix.

No sorry, you're still seeing it the wrong way round.

He lacks belief because he doesn't believe in his game. He is right not to, it's been found out.
He will restore belief by changing his game, incorporating the parts most natural to him.

He has said some of these things himself, it isn't just me & others here.

Game first, belief second.

Suppose we will just have to agree to disagree then. You can pick out one thing that he has said if it suits your argument. Bit like using favourable stats but ignoring the less favourable ones. He has also said recently that he needed to train harder as mentioned earlier in this thread and was criticised for. Then after the Inser game he said he was just trying to play solid and was not over worried about how he won as long as he won. So including the one you are referring to there are three different approaches. Will be interesting to see how he progresses from here.

Training harder only glosses over the problems in his game right now.

If Andy doesn't adapt and change his game, he will continue to fall into the world mediocrity.

Lack of belief is a state of mind and not a wise one to be trying to change your game with a scrambled mind. Besides he says he has begun turning to variety many of us here would say they haven't seen it in the last few matches. Perhaps because that lack of belief his hindering his all-round game?

I give up, you just can't get it.

I guess if it's mental then you're in despair that he's engaged as his coach one of the biggest mental midgets of the last 20 years.

Maybe he should just go to therapy then?

No I just have a different opinion and way of seeing it so see no need to get so catty.

There is much that needs to change about Andy's game at the moment but even more important is the mental mindset - low on confidence and self belief. He has been this way for most if not all of this season apart from odd flashes. Variety may be the answer but it was Lendl's way that won him slams so that wasn't all bad either.

Andy is at the crossroads of his career and it is 50-50 how things will turn out for him. Obviously, I wish him well.

Still, it's a nice excuse for a limited game isn't it? "Oh he's really great but it's just a lack of belief that's letting him down". Nonsense.

By the way....... belief in what?

I have said elsewhere on his day he is capable of beating the very best players in the world and it is only you who brings up a 'limited game' . I am sure you know the belief I talk of - self-belief which is just as crucial to success as implementing a successful game plan. Self-belief breeds confidence breeds results breeds titles. Murray hasn't had one of them in over a year.