Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Murray is NOT better than Nadal. How can he be better than a guy who has a 13-6 record against him, 10 more Slams, and twice as many titles? The only reason Nadal is ranked lower is because he missed half of last season, which now only means he has no points to defend from here on out. So he has a decent shot at knocking Murray down to No. 3 with a strong showing at the U.S. Open.
Currently the Top 2 Rankings are representative of what has happened in the last 12 months, apart from some question about who should be Number 1 or 2.
On current form they are comprehensively the best 2 players in the world.
I am not suggesting Murray is a better player than Nadal overall, or will get anywhere near his record.
In many ways, Murray's career path has been similar to his coach Ivan Lendl's.
Both did a very long apprenticeship, and both endured heartache and set-backs early in their careers.
Both lost their 1st 4 Grand Slam Finals, an unenviable record that they would love to change.
Lendl went on to win 8 Grand Slams (the same as Agassi) through his steely resolve and sheer determination. Murray I have no doubt will get a few more as well.
I have no doubt Nadal will move quickly to Number 3, but seriously question whether he can challenge Murray and Joker for the titles and Majors in the upcoming Hard Court season over the next several months.
What I don't understand is why some people want to continue to belittle Andy Murray. (I'm referring to Timing2012 and Malibu Mike3, not BajanYankee.) OK, the guy took a long time to win his first Slam. OK, the guy has won only 2 Slams so far. OK, his career accomplishments pale in comparison to Nadal and Djokovic, who are similar in age (Nadal is about 9 months older, Djokovic is 1 week younger). I get all of those things, and won't argue any of those things. But Murray is clearly more accomplished than the other current top players besides Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic, and has already accomplished more than many other really good players from the past. He's still in the middle of his career and likely to build on his accomplishments. Yes, it is unlikely that he will match the career accomplishments of Federer, Nadal, or probably Djokovic, but that doesn't mean he won't have had a very accomplished career by the time he lays down the racket permanently. I mean, I don't see people mocking say Jim Courier because he won "only" 4 Slams and pales in comparison to Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, or Boris Becker career accomplishment-wise. Courier is acknowledged as a great player in his era, if not quite an all-time great. Just because Courier wasn't one of the top 2 players of his era doesn't mean he wasn't great though. And IMO, the same argument also holds true or will hold true with Andy Murray.
Currently the Top 2 Rankings are representative of what has happened in the last 12 months, apart from some question about who should be Number 1 or 2.
On current form they are comprehensively the best 2 players in the world.
I am not suggesting Murray is a better player than Nadal overall, or will get anywhere near his record.
In many ways, Murray's career path has been similar to his coach Ivan Lendl's.
Both did a very long apprenticeship, and both endured heartache and set-backs early in their careers.
Both lost their 1st 4 Grand Slam Finals, an unenviable record that they would love to change.
Lendl went on to win 8 Grand Slams (the same as Agassi) through his steely resolve and sheer determination. Murray I have no doubt will get a few more as well.
I have no doubt Nadal will move quickly to Number 3, but seriously question whether he can challenge Murray and Joker for the titles and Majors in the upcoming Hard Court season over the next several months.
Nadal and Murray have only met on clay 4 times (all won by Nadal, obvi). That means even if you discounted those wins, Nadal would still have a 9-6 head-to-head record against Murray on his best surfaces (Nadal beat Murray at Wimbledon too). So a rested Nadal would definitely give Murray all he can handle and then some on hard court. Nadal won their encounter at the U.S. Open just two years ago.
Murray is CURRENTLY better than Nadal! Not over their careers.
No he's not. You could have made the same argument for Nadal a month ago when he was hoisting the Coupe de Mousqetaires over his head for the 8th time.
Nadal and Murray have only met on clay 4 times (all won by Nadal, obvi). That means even if you discounted those wins, Nadal would still have a 9-6 head-to-head record against Murray on his best surfaces (Nadal beat Murray at Wimbledon too). So a rested Nadal would definitely give Murray all he can handle and then some on hard court. Nadal won their encounter at the U.S. Open just two years ago.
That is the key feature - 2 years ago he beat Murray, and was then Runner Up to Joker, and it is now 3 years since he actually won it, which was also happens to be his last non-French Major - the 2010 US Open.
That's now a long time without a Hard Court Major.
There is a definite trend here.
Nadal definitely has had Murray's number in big matches in the past, especially when they played 3 times in Slam events in 2011 (French Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, all Nadal wins). However, they haven't played since 2011, and Murray appears to have improved since then while Nadal may have declined slightly. It is unclear to me who would win if they played each other right now. That's why I think a Nadal/Murray match at say this year's U.S. Open would be fascinating.
Incidentally, it should be noted that Nadal has appeared in the finals of 3 of the last 4 hard court Slam events he's played in (2010 U.S. Open, 2011 U.S. Open, 2012 Australian Open). Of course, Murray has appeared in the last 2 hard court Slam finals he's played in (2012 U.S. Open, 2013 Australian Open). For whatever it is worth, Djokovic was the opponent in all 5 of those Grand Slam finals. (Djokovic has appeared in 6 straight hard court Grand Slam finals, and has played Nadal and Murray 3 times each in that stretch - Murray also appeared in the 2011 Australian Open final.)
That is the key feature - 2 years ago he beat Murray, and was then Runner Up to Joker, and it is now 3 years since he actually won it, which was also happens to be his last non-French Major - the 2010 US Open.
That's now a long time without a Hard Court Major. There is a definite trend here.
How is it a definite trend if he missed the last two hard court majors and then made the Final of the two before that? And there's no point in mentioning the fact he lost to Djokovic because we're comparing Nadal and Murray here. We know Djokovic can beat Nadal consistently on any surface other than clay, but the question is now whether Murray can. I don't think so because he hasn't proven he can (unlike Djokovic).
In years past, Nadal has been worn out by the beginning of the hard court season because he's won Roland Garros and played Wimbledon (usually advancing deep into the draw there). This year he should be well rested since he got bounced in the first round in SW19. I doubt he'll play many events leading up to the Open, which means he should be healthy. And we have to remember that a Rafa Nadal that missed 9 months on the Tour nonetheless made the final of every tournament he's played since except Wimbledon. He's no sure bet to win the Open, but I'd put my money on Rafa against Andy Murray. That's for sure.
How is it a definite trend if he missed the last two hard court majors and then made the Final of the two before that? And there's no point in mentioning the fact he lost to Djokovic because we're comparing Nadal and Murray here. We know Djokovic can beat Nadal consistently on any surface other than clay, but the question is now whether Murray can. I don't think so because he hasn't proven he can (unlike Djokovic).
In years past, Nadal has been worn out by the beginning of the hard court season because he's won Roland Garros and played Wimbledon (usually advancing deep into the draw there). This year he should be well rested since he got bounced in the first round in SW19. I doubt he'll play many events leading up to the Open, which means he should be healthy. And we have to remember that a Rafa Nadal that missed 9 months on the Tour nonetheless made the final of every tournament he's played since except Wimbledon. He's no sure bet to win the Open, but I'd put my money on Rafa against Andy Murray. That's for sure.
That's all well and good, but I think you are under-estimating how much Murray has improved in the last 2 years under the pupilage of Ivan Lendl, as well as the fact that just possilby Nadal is not quite as difficult to beat as he used to be.
I actually regard Murray as the best player in the world right now, ahead of Djokovic, and his temperament also no longer falters.
Murray now has renewed motivation to keep this role going, and is certainly not complacent.
On these scores I would currently (right here, right now - 2013) back Murray over Nadal on all surfaces bar clay, so we will have to agree to disagree.
I also don't think Nadal can beat either of the Top 2 at the upcoming US or Australian Opens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
