FO Semi Nadal v Murray

First topic message reminder :

Well a week ago before Murray's injury and Nadal's poor form, it woudl have been a no brainer. A week later and things are very different.

Nadal will certainly exploit that ankle's weakness but as Soderling proved yesterday, you can force Nadal to do the running if you can take the ball early.

I see Nadal winning there...especially if it stays windy.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

sonic_boom10 wrote:Conditions where dreadful otherwise victory margin would've been much wider

How so?? In the past in windy conditions it has always favoured Rafa (Indian Wells last year) and besides the wind today definitely came to Rafa's rescue in a crucial break point in the first set.

Indian Wells the wind was a constant factor. Today the wind got involved when it felt like it.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Of course it is his worst surface. Before this season he'd never really threatened on clay and the 4th Round was his best performance at Roland Garros until this year. On grass he won the Stella Artois and has already reached two Wimbledon semi-finals which is a marked difference from his record on clay.

OK, we shall see. Agree until this year he has underperformed on clay but I would argue that getting to today's semi, and his performance against Djokovic in Rome and Nadal in MC, outweighs what he has achieved on grass and augurs well for the future. I don't rate winning a practise tournament like Queens to be a great feather in his cap and in his two Wimbledon semis he was given a tennis lesson by Nadal in one and was beaten by a serial choker in the other.

Tennis is all about opinions, isn't it?

I think you will have to look very hard to find tennis experts who'd claim Andy Murray was stronger on clay than grass. Like you say though all about opinions but stats suggest he is better on grass as well.

michael_o wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Of course it is his worst surface. Before this season he'd never really threatened on clay and the 4th Round was his best performance at Roland Garros until this year. On grass he won the Stella Artois and has already reached two Wimbledon semi-finals which is a marked difference from his record on clay.

OK, we shall see. Agree until this year he has underperformed on clay but I would argue that getting to today's semi, and his performance against Djokovic in Rome and Nadal in MC, outweighs what he has achieved on grass and augurs well for the future. I don't rate winning a practise tournament like Queens to be a great feather in his cap and in his two Wimbledon semis he was given a tennis lesson by Nadal in one and was beaten by a serial choker in the other.

Tennis is all about opinions, isn't it?

Two Wimbledon semi's are his finest achievements. Wimbledon is the greatest tennis event in the World.

"two Wimbledon semis he was given a tennis lesson by Nadal in one and was beaten by a serial choker in the other."

Given a tennis lesson by Nadal? Do you not remember how tight that match was? Nadal won about 6 or 7 more points in the entire match! I remember midway through the third set Murray was ahead on points, but 2 sets down.

Nadal played great, and just a little better than Murray... But a "tennis lesson"?? Come on!

michael o obviously didn't watch the same Wimbledon Semi
as the rest of us

Hmm a serial choker that pushed the perceived GOAT Roger Federer to 16-14 in the fifth set and has won a slam.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hmm a serial choker that pushed the perceived GOAT Roger Federer to 16-14 in the fifth set and has won a slam.

I'd love to be that supposed 'serial choker'. Slam winner, multi Masters 1000 winner and former World no 1. Not to bad a career

OK it was tight and I might have exaggerated when I said "tennis Lesson". But I felt that Nadal was never under seious threat whereas I felt he was at times today.

sonic_boom10 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hmm a serial choker that pushed the perceived GOAT Roger Federer to 16-14 in the fifth set and has won a slam.

I'd love to be that supposed 'serial choker'. Slam winner, multi Masters 1000 winner and former World no 1. Not to bad a career

Sorry? Who are we talking about here? I was referring to Nalbandian.....that may have been a QF.....memory's not what it was.

Murray had many opportunties, but was never had set point... Which he did in the semi at Wimbledon. On his serve too.

The matches were very similar in many ways, Nadal just playing the big points a bit better. Or perhaps, a bit more ambitiously. The belief to do that comes from his many slam successes I think, the ability to just go for it when it matters.

Anyway, I digress... No lessons were dished out in either match.

If you have a point to make, back it up. Enough of the insults.

Sorry Y I Man just pointing out that michael-o is a bit off the mark with his comments. He made a big error mistaking David Nalbandian for Andy Roddick who it was that beat Andy Murray in the 2009 Wimbledon Semi-Final labelling that player as a serial-choker.

YI Man I think our points were made before a massive error was made by one of the posters. If people are to comment on the sport, please at least show it some respect and have the facts to hand before making such comments.