I'm not a hater.............................. but

[technodup]

Aye, there's a fine line between acceptable and not. Trouble is sometimes to find the line you have to get pretty near it.

 

[feetabix]

yeah....i held off the dunblane comments. some subjects go beyond flippant humour......i feel as a brit i should be behind him in his efforts in his sport, i just dont seem to be able to manage it though, i struggle to be able to justify what is a natural reaction to me, i just dont like what i see......the three players ranked above him seem so much more likeable, and will prevent his progress, all things even.....

 

[technodup]

To be fair I'm not sure that the multi-millionaire, tournament winning Scottish tennis player will be that bothered about a few English not coming to terms with the fact he's the best Brit in decades.

Course that Henman guy was as personable as he was successful, so it's a lot to live up to.

 

[capitanfigueras]

Just for the record, whatever anyone thinks of him, I have full confidence he will enter the top two within the next three years.

Is your confidence based on Federer retiring and Nadal's knees giving up? He's a talented and fit player but the guys above him have a greater natural range and better consistency.

 

[technodup]

Andy is pretty handy, but he is no Henman.

Eh?

That means much more than any one off major win

Rubbish. It's all about the winning. I've never heard a tennis player, golfer, snooker or anything else say they'd rather be ranked no. 1 than win the major titles. It's all about winning medals, titles and trophies.

I think Murray will do both, probably as Federer and Nadal start to decline. And there's no real shame in that tbh.

 

[al]

I don't do Nationalism, so to me Murray is just a bloke that plays tennis,and I can't stand to look at his miserable face.

al.

 

[cornholio's RC200]

I'm not Scottish, I'm English - but more importantly I'm British. I don't even particularly like tennis but I just think it is a good thing to have someone there. I think it would be a good thing for a British person to win a grand slam; the last one was in 1977 and I was a nipper then. Personality or not, he's in there and stands as good a chance as "comeontim" (all the personality of a wet weekend in Clacton) ever did.

Just like motor racing; I loathe Lewis Hamilton but it raises the status even more in the country if there is a world champion or someone doing well in it and might just encourage more to join in. Has Peaty raised the status of downhill racing in this country? You bet he has and no doubt has encouraged many more people to take up the sport.

So "comeonandy"

 

[technodup]

Andy is pretty handy, but he is no Henman.

Eh?

That means much more than any one off major win

Rubbish. It's all about the winning. I've never heard a tennis player, golfer, snooker or anything else say they'd rather be ranked no. 1 than win the major titles. It's all about winning medals, titles and trophies.

I think Murray will do both, probably as Federer and Nadal start to decline. And there's no real shame in that tbh.

I thought we Scots were known for our ironic sensibility.

That's the way I read it first, then reading the second bit I wasn't sure.

My point about winning a Grand Slam is that it is all everyone keeps talking about in relation to Murray, as though he is somehow not a highly successful player until he does.

I cannot imagine he would achieve world number one without winning a major, I am suggesting that achieving world number one would involve winning a at least a couple and thus would be much more significant than achieving a one off GS win in a season.

Why would you imagine Nadal to fade away before Murray anyway?

With the other three picking up all the majors he won't rise any higher until they fall away or get very lucky, that's true.

I think Murray will outlast Nadal due partly to fitness/injury but also because Nadal could retire at any time and be happy with his achievements and be regarded as one of the best ever. I couldn't say the same for Murray.

Ultimately success in sport mean winning things, and in tennis that's GS titles. No amount of tour wins or rankings compare. Maybe not entirely rational but that's the way it is. I do think if he wins one he could go on and win more, but feel that he needs a lucky draw to get the first in the bag. At the minute it seems he has to beat two of the top three every time, if one of them fell at the 1/4s he'd have a shout.

I'm no nationalist btw.

 

[technodup]

I am assuming getting to No. 1 will involve winning at least one GS, that is why I think it will have more significance to Murray than, say, winning one in a season in which he then falls out of the top ten for whatever reason.

If I was on Twitter I'd ask him myself. But I'm not. I still reckon a GS is the priority althought ranking should/could follow and be some icing on top. US should be his best chance. He likes the surface, conditions usually OK and none of the Wimbledon hype to distract him.

Fair point about youngsters though. Looks like he'll have his hands full with the top three for a while yet so he doesn't need any smart arse weans coming through and overtaking him.

 

[technodup]

But they had comeontim and the Canadian.

At least the Canadian got to a GS final, which is more than can be said of the perennial bottler.