Topic: ANDY MURRAY THREAD (quotes, pictures, articles, etc.)

[Alex]

I actually found a good pic of Murray, wow.  .

 

[Dallas]

I actually found a good pic of Murray, wow.  .

 

You're right... not too bad.

[jeffrx]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

[Alison2006]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

Yep, But my point was he has not got IMHO the correct people around him 
Yep he has all the skills and tools (too many and needs to know when to use them), with Brad he was getting somewhere IMHO
Yep they didn't see eye to eye  same with his previous coach Mark Petchy 

Here is where the problem lies (from my view), he wants to be his own BOSS = wrong idea

He will not take advice from a "coach" - the break down of his two previous coaches

Mature he is not (if thinking he knows best - being his own Boss)

IMHO he surrounds himself with "YES " people (the easy option)

[kittens25]

It is a shame if he did not achieve more.   He is so much more talented then the likes of Gasquet, Baghdatis, Berdych, Monfils, and should be having much more success then those 4.

[kittens25]

Concerning Berdych: I thought he had regressed?

Hardly.  He recently reached the top 10 for the first time ever (has since dropped out), and had his most consistent string of slam performances ever for awhile.  He has simply has maxed out, which is at good but not that good.   

[Alison2006]

It is a shame if he did not achieve more.   He is so much more talented then the likes of Gasquet, Baghdatis, Berdych, Monfils, and should be having much more success then those 4.

Welcome back kittens 

As I have said, he needs a coach (that he listens to) do you agree? (not his current set up)

Everyone has missed my point 

[kittens25]

It is a shame if he did not achieve more.   He is so much more talented then the likes of Gasquet, Baghdatis, Berdych, Monfils, and should be having much more success then those 4.

Welcome back kittens 

As I have said, he needs a coach (that he listens to) do you agree? (not his current set up)

Everyone has missed my point 

I agree.  He needs a coach and a solid plan of how he is going to reach his goals with this coach.   He needs a coach who can be a bit flexible with him, but he also has to give a bit and be flexible to the coach as well.

[Alison2006]

It is a shame if he did not achieve more.   He is so much more talented then the likes of Gasquet, Baghdatis, Berdych, Monfils, and should be having much more success then those 4.

Welcome back kittens 

As I have said, he needs a coach (that he listens to) do you agree? (not his current set up)

Everyone has missed my point 

I agree.  He needs a coach and a solid plan of how he is going to reach his goals with this coach.   He needs a coach who can be a bit flexible with him, but he also has to give a bit and be flexible to the coach as well.

Yep, thanxs kittens, indeed a "coach" that is flexible with him, but also a coach that is "tough" with him (which I beleive his two previous where and they get sacked), thats my main concern for him, he does not listen and take advice, perhaps another year ahead of him and he will choose a coach he needs, IMHO he needs this now, not in a year, after having yes men around him (he will like this set-up and get use to it), just my view of course 

[FreeBird]

I admit that I haven't followed Murray in much detail over the last couple years, but I think he might've made the right move to sack Gilbert.  The Murray that I saw take apart Roddick a couple years ago at Wimbledon did so with a shotmaking brilliance that was McEnroe-esque IMO.  From what I've seen of Gilbert's direction, he tried to make Murray into Agassi part 2 - beef him up, work on big topspin groundies and consistency.  Those abilities aren't necessarily going to hurt any player's game, but I don't think that's where Murray's strengths lie.  He's a shotmaker and potential tennis genius.  And I don't think Gilbert was working in that direction at all.  I think he needs a coach that's going to embrace his on-court creativity, and I don't think that's Gilbert.  Now, Andy, go prove me right!!!

[Alison2006]

I admit that I haven't followed Murray in much detail over the last couple years, but I think he might've made the right move to sack Gilbert.  The Murray that I saw take apart Roddick a couple years ago at Wimbledon did so with a shotmaking brilliance that was McEnroe-esque IMO.  From what I've seen of Gilbert's direction, he tried to make Murray into Agassi part 2 - beef him up, work on big topspin groundies and consistency.  Those abilities aren't necessarily going to hurt any player's game, but I don't think that's where Murray's strengths lie.  He's a shotmaker and potential tennis genius.  And I don't think Gilbert was working in that direction at all.  I think he needs a coach that's going to embrace his on-court creativity, and I don't think that's Gilbert.  Now, Andy, go prove me right!!!

Interesting post thank you

<Quote I think he needs a coach that's going to embrace his on-court creativity>End Quote>

Yep I agree, but it's not the set up IMHO that he's got right now with Miles   

[TennisVeritas]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

Yep, But my point was he has not got IMHO the correct people around him 
Yep he has all the skills and tools (too many and needs to know when to use them), with Brad he was getting somewhere IMHO
Yep they didn't see eye to eye  same with his previous coach Mark Petchy 

Here is where the problem lies (from my view), he wants to be his own BOSS = wrong idea

He will not take advice from a "coach" - the break down of his two previous coaches

Mature he is not (if thinking he knows best - being his own Boss)

IMHO he surrounds himself with "YES " people (the easy option)

Hi Alison, you posted this in another thread:

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

And there in the other thread I did an answer but it was unnoticed by you I guess. Nevertheless, here my opinion I have posted there (BTW: I am far from a Tennis expert: I like and I am passionate by Tennis and I was until few years ago a decent player, but a part from that):

But this is why I do not see Pete as being a (potential) great coach: His game was based mainly on some elements that you cannot easily explain and teach to someone other: So, I really do not believe it will be a great idea for Djoko to have Pete as a coach to prepare Wimbledon, IMO, the "aggression to the net" (more than the "simple" S&V because it implies as well the charge on respond games) is something that can be done if and only if you have a player with superior skills either in term of anticipations (FED) or reflexes (Pete)..

Djoko is good on both (might be more in anticipations that reflexes) but he is not exceptional..IMO: the real guy who will be able to do more out there to aggress from the net is  Andy Murray: Yes this guy, I saw him in the first week at RG (against Eysseric-VERY TALENTED LEFTY PLAYER BTW), he has a superior anticipations skills and the reflexes are also at a very high level:

Unfortunately, Murray does not believe enough on his own skills and weapons. Against Eysseric he started to play aggressive at the net and short the rallies only after he was down 2 sets to 1.

BTW: Gilbert tried to push him to a more aggressive (at the net) Tennis..Conclusion: He decided to end the collaboration!! It is really a shame IMO. But, ok, there is still time in front of him and might be someone will at the end convince him that the right strategy is the one of being more aggressive at the net and short the rallies.

So as a conclusion, out there are certainly guys who will be able to implement a successfully a (sort) of Pete's aggressive strategy (once again Andy is at the top of my list at the moment, but there is Gublis / Gasquet and others) BUT they have to believe on it (difficult given the quality of today's passing shot) and it will become more and more difficult to implement given the high level of the defence game out there (more it is even imprioving with the time!!) 

Now, please note that my second fav player out there is Djoko (despite his family as you know and I will not stress once again who is my first pref player )..

Besides, this year, as usual, I have attempt the first week at RG (this is why I am telling you that I saw live Andy..But I saw also Djoko and FED ,  unfortunately not Rafa)..

Anyway, I am always there on the GS event which the wrong surface (I like so much grass and I ending up watching always the GS on clay..)

This is not a problem in any case: Great Tennis is great Tennis whatever the surface..

To conclude: Andy is a great (potential) player but he is fragile in his head: He really gives the feeling to be "close" to external ideas.

Just the contrary of Djoko: A very solid and focus guy who has improved so much once he found the right coach (i.e. two years ago) and who is constantly asking himself how to improve and move on IMO.

[Alison2006]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

Yep, But my point was he has not got IMHO the correct people around him 
Yep he has all the skills and tools (too many and needs to know when to use them), with Brad he was getting somewhere IMHO
Yep they didn't see eye to eye  same with his previous coach Mark Petchy 

Here is where the problem lies (from my view), he wants to be his own BOSS = wrong idea

He will not take advice from a "coach" - the break down of his two previous coaches

Mature he is not (if thinking he knows best - being his own Boss)

IMHO he surrounds himself with "YES " people (the easy option)

Hi Alison, you posted this in another thread:

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

And there in the other thread I did an answer but it was unnoticed by you I guess. Nevertheless, here my opinion I have posted there (BTW: I am far from a Tennis expert: I like and I am passionate by Tennis and I was until few years ago a decent player, but a part from that):

But this is why I do not see Pete as being a (potential) great coach: His game was based mainly on some elements that you cannot easily explain and teach to someone other: So, I really do not believe it will be a great idea for Djoko to have Pete as a coach to prepare Wimbledon, IMO, the "aggression to the net" (more than the "simple" S&V because it implies as well the charge on respond games) is something that can be done if and only if you have a player with superior skills either in term of anticipations (FED) or reflexes (Pete)..

Djoko is good on both (might be more in anticipations that reflexes) but he is not exceptional..IMO: the real guy who will be able to do more out there to aggress from the net is  Andy Murray: Yes this guy, I saw him in the first week at RG (against Eysseric-VERY TALENTED LEFTY PLAYER BTW), he has a superior anticipations skills and the reflexes are also at a very high level:

Unfortunately, Murray does not believe enough on his own skills and weapons. Against Eysseric he started to play aggressive at the net and short the rallies only after he was down 2 sets to 1.

BTW: Gilbert tried to push him to a more aggressive (at the net) Tennis..Conclusion: He decided to end the collaboration!! It is really a shame IMO. But, ok, there is still time in front of him and might be someone will at the end convince him that the right strategy is the one of being more aggressive at the net and short the rallies.

So as a conclusion, out there are certainly guys who will be able to implement a successfully a (sort) of Pete's aggressive strategy (once again Andy is at the top of my list at the moment, but there is Gublis / Gasquet and others) BUT they have to believe on it (difficult given the quality of today's passing shot) and it will become more and more difficult to implement given the high level of the defence game out there (more it is even imprioving with the time!!) 

Now, please note that my second fav player out there is Djoko (despite his family as you know and I will not stress once again who is my first pref player )..

Besides, this year, as usual, I have attempt the first week at RG (this is why I am telling you that I saw live Andy..But I saw also Djoko and FED ,  unfortunately not Rafa)..

Anyway, I am always there on the GS event which the wrong surface (I like so much grass and I ending up watching always the GS on clay..)

This is not a problem in any case: Great Tennis is great Tennis whatever the surface..

To conclude: Andy is a great (potential) player but he is fragile in his head: He really gives the feeling to be "close" to external ideas.

Just the contrary of Djoko: A very solid and focus guy who has improved so much once he found the right coach (i.e. two years ago) and who is constantly asking himself how to improve and move on IMO.

Thanks and hi Tennisveritas, I didn't notice your reply in the other thread  , but thanks for the reply

I didn't mention Pete being a great coach  WTF
Anyway, I have said and stressed previous about Murray attacking the net, be more agressive, keep the point short....

We agree on that  Yep he leaves Gilbert (6 months of that was injury as well), I am not Gilberts greatest fan, but he took two players to GS's, I wished at least he listened and took advice for a little while longer, but he wants to be his own boss 
Agree about Djoko, he went and found a great coach (this is what I want Murray to do), but he has to listen and be mature (like Djoko and respect the coach)

Not sure what you mean "fragile in the head" please explain 

No need to stress Djoko is your 2nd player = We agree on that

[TennisVeritas]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

Yep, But my point was he has not got IMHO the correct people around him 
Yep he has all the skills and tools (too many and needs to know when to use them), with Brad he was getting somewhere IMHO
Yep they didn't see eye to eye  same with his previous coach Mark Petchy 

Here is where the problem lies (from my view), he wants to be his own BOSS = wrong idea

He will not take advice from a "coach" - the break down of his two previous coaches

Mature he is not (if thinking he knows best - being his own Boss)

IMHO he surrounds himself with "YES " people (the easy option)

Hi Alison, you posted this in another thread:

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

And there in the other thread I did an answer but it was unnoticed by you I guess. Nevertheless, here my opinion I have posted there (BTW: I am far from a Tennis expert: I like and I am passionate by Tennis and I was until few years ago a decent player, but a part from that):

But this is why I do not see Pete as being a (potential) great coach: His game was based mainly on some elements that you cannot easily explain and teach to someone other: So, I really do not believe it will be a great idea for Djoko to have Pete as a coach to prepare Wimbledon, IMO, the "aggression to the net" (more than the "simple" S&V because it implies as well the charge on respond games) is something that can be done if and only if you have a player with superior skills either in term of anticipations (FED) or reflexes (Pete)..

Djoko is good on both (might be more in anticipations that reflexes) but he is not exceptional..IMO: the real guy who will be able to do more out there to aggress from the net is  Andy Murray: Yes this guy, I saw him in the first week at RG (against Eysseric-VERY TALENTED LEFTY PLAYER BTW), he has a superior anticipations skills and the reflexes are also at a very high level:

Unfortunately, Murray does not believe enough on his own skills and weapons. Against Eysseric he started to play aggressive at the net and short the rallies only after he was down 2 sets to 1.

BTW: Gilbert tried to push him to a more aggressive (at the net) Tennis..Conclusion: He decided to end the collaboration!! It is really a shame IMO. But, ok, there is still time in front of him and might be someone will at the end convince him that the right strategy is the one of being more aggressive at the net and short the rallies.

So as a conclusion, out there are certainly guys who will be able to implement a successfully a (sort) of Pete's aggressive strategy (once again Andy is at the top of my list at the moment, but there is Gublis / Gasquet and others) BUT they have to believe on it (difficult given the quality of today's passing shot) and it will become more and more difficult to implement given the high level of the defence game out there (more it is even imprioving with the time!!) 

Now, please note that my second fav player out there is Djoko (despite his family as you know and I will not stress once again who is my first pref player )..

Besides, this year, as usual, I have attempt the first week at RG (this is why I am telling you that I saw live Andy..But I saw also Djoko and FED ,  unfortunately not Rafa)..

Anyway, I am always there on the GS event which the wrong surface (I like so much grass and I ending up watching always the GS on clay..)

This is not a problem in any case: Great Tennis is great Tennis whatever the surface..

To conclude: Andy is a great (potential) player but he is fragile in his head: He really gives the feeling to be "close" to external ideas.

Just the contrary of Djoko: A very solid and focus guy who has improved so much once he found the right coach (i.e. two years ago) and who is constantly asking himself how to improve and move on IMO.

Thanks and hi Tennisveritas, I didn't notice your reply in the other thread  , but thanks for the reply

I didn't mention Pete being a great coach  WTF
Anyway, I have said and stressed previous about Murray attacking the net, be more agressive, keep the point short....

We agree on that  Yep he leaves Gilbert (6 months of that was injury as well), I am not Gilberts greatest fan, but he took two players to GS's, I wished at least he listened and took advice for a little while longer, but he wants to be his own boss 
Agree about Djoko, he went and found a great coach (this is what I want Murray to do), but he has to listen and be mature (like Djoko and respect the coach)

Not sure what you mean "fragile in the head" please explain 

No need to stress Djoko is your 2nd player = We agree on that

Hi Alison,

"fragile in the head" well it means that he takes too much time to figure out the right strategy: Andy is talented (no doubt) so he has at disposal a plan"A" a Plan "B" and even some variations of the two..Still, if he starts in a given mood with a given plan he is too slow in changing it ..

Once again the main example was the match I saw at  RG: He went down 2 sets to 1 in order to finally discover that the rallies from the baseline was not a winning proposition..

Djoko on that side he is a lot more mature (this guy learn so quickly moreover, it is amazing): He has his plan but he is able to adapt it already..

Main example the way in which he managed to win at ROME against Stan the man: Basically, after a first set in which he was waiting his opponent he moved to a more aggressive path, in which he was forcing his opponent to accept the rallies..

BTW: You did not talk about Pete being a good coach or not, but this was one of the topics under discussion on the other thread so it remains in my post here..You see..  

[Start da Game]

why can't pete be a great coach?

[Alison2006]

He has the tools, now he needs to figure out how to use them to win.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.  If you could take Nadal's mind/heart and Murray's skills, you would have a hard court slam champ.   

Yep, But my point was he has not got IMHO the correct people around him 
Yep he has all the skills and tools (too many and needs to know when to use them), with Brad he was getting somewhere IMHO
Yep they didn't see eye to eye  same with his previous coach Mark Petchy 

Here is where the problem lies (from my view), he wants to be his own BOSS = wrong idea

He will not take advice from a "coach" - the break down of his two previous coaches

Mature he is not (if thinking he knows best - being his own Boss)

IMHO he surrounds himself with "YES " people (the easy option)

Hi Alison, you posted this in another thread:

Tennisveritas may I ask you your views on Andy Murray  I only ask you as your are such an expert on Tennis, I would like to know your views on his game.

I only ask you on this thread as this is where most of your time is spent (or on the RF thread) 

Would you bring your expert view over om my Andy Murray thread please?

It will make a change to hear your expert views on another player

Thankyou

And there in the other thread I did an answer but it was unnoticed by you I guess. Nevertheless, here my opinion I have posted there (BTW: I am far from a Tennis expert: I like and I am passionate by Tennis and I was until few years ago a decent player, but a part from that):

But this is why I do not see Pete as being a (potential) great coach: His game was based mainly on some elements that you cannot easily explain and teach to someone other: So, I really do not believe it will be a great idea for Djoko to have Pete as a coach to prepare Wimbledon, IMO, the "aggression to the net" (more than the "simple" S&V because it implies as well the charge on respond games) is something that can be done if and only if you have a player with superior skills either in term of anticipations (FED) or reflexes (Pete)..

Djoko is good on both (might be more in anticipations that reflexes) but he is not exceptional..IMO: the real guy who will be able to do more out there to aggress from the net is  Andy Murray: Yes this guy, I saw him in the first week at RG (against Eysseric-VERY TALENTED LEFTY PLAYER BTW), he has a superior anticipations skills and the reflexes are also at a very high level:

Unfortunately, Murray does not believe enough on his own skills and weapons. Against Eysseric he started to play aggressive at the net and short the rallies only after he was down 2 sets to 1.

BTW: Gilbert tried to push him to a more aggressive (at the net) Tennis..Conclusion: He decided to end the collaboration!! It is really a shame IMO. But, ok, there is still time in front of him and might be someone will at the end convince him that the right strategy is the one of being more aggressive at the net and short the rallies.

So as a conclusion, out there are certainly guys who will be able to implement a successfully a (sort) of Pete's aggressive strategy (once again Andy is at the top of my list at the moment, but there is Gublis / Gasquet and others) BUT they have to believe on it (difficult given the quality of today's passing shot) and it will become more and more difficult to implement given the high level of the defence game out there (more it is even imprioving with the time!!) 

Now, please note that my second fav player out there is Djoko (despite his family as you know and I will not stress once again who is my first pref player )..

Besides, this year, as usual, I have attempt the first week at RG (this is why I am telling you that I saw live Andy..But I saw also Djoko and FED ,  unfortunately not Rafa)..

Anyway, I am always there on the GS event which the wrong surface (I like so much grass and I ending up watching always the GS on clay..)

This is not a problem in any case: Great Tennis is great Tennis whatever the surface..

To conclude: Andy is a great (potential) player but he is fragile in his head: He really gives the feeling to be "close" to external ideas.

Just the contrary of Djoko: A very solid and focus guy who has improved so much once he found the right coach (i.e. two years ago) and who is constantly asking himself how to improve and move on IMO.

Thanks and hi Tennisveritas, I didn't notice your reply in the other thread  , but thanks for the reply

I didn't mention Pete being a great coach  WTF
Anyway, I have said and stressed previous about Murray attacking the net, be more agressive, keep the point short....

We agree on that  Yep he leaves Gilbert (6 months of that was injury as well), I am not Gilberts greatest fan, but he took two players to GS's, I wished at least he listened and took advice for a little while longer, but he wants to be his own boss 
Agree about Djoko, he went and found a great coach (this is what I want Murray to do), but he has to listen and be mature (like Djoko and respect the coach)

Not sure what you mean "fragile in the head" please explain 

No need to stress Djoko is your 2nd player = We agree on that

Hi Alison,

"fragile in the head" well it means that he takes too much time to figure out the right strategy: Andy is talented (no doubt) so he has at disposal a plan"A" a Plan "B" and even some variations of the two..Still, if he starts in a given mood with a given plan he is too slow in changing it ..

Once again the main example was the match I saw at  RG: He went down 2 sets to 1 in order to finally discover that the rallies from the baseline was not a winning proposition..

Djoko on that side he is a lot more mature (this guy learn so quickly moreover, it is amazing): He has his plan but he is able to adapt it already..

Main example the way in which he managed to win at ROME against Stan the man: Basically, after a first set in which he was waiting his opponent he moved to a more aggressive path, in which he was forcing his opponent to accept the rallies..

BTW: You did not talk about Pete being a good coach or not, but this was one of the topics under discussion on the other thread so it remains in my post here..You see..  

Mmm I understand what you mean now  (with the fragile in the head) so would a coach (the correct one) help him in this area? yes is my view, thats why Djoko (with the "correct" coach helps him and he listens as I posted previous) he is more mature in his approach to help with the continue of his tennis career IMO

Thanxs for clearing up the Pete situation (I thought I was going even madder  )

[dmastous]

Not sure what you mean "fragile in the head" please explain 

No need to stress Djoko is your 2nd player = We agree on that

Hi Alison,

"fragile in the head" well it means that he takes too much time to figure out the right strategy: Andy is talented (no doubt) so he has at disposal a plan"A" a Plan "B" and even some variations of the two..Still, if he starts in a given mood with a given plan he is too slow in changing it ..

Once again the main example was the match I saw at  RG: He went down 2 sets to 1 in order to finally discover that the rallies from the baseline was not a winning proposition..

Djoko on that side he is a lot more mature (this guy learn so quickly moreover, it is amazing): He has his plan but he is able to adapt it already..

Main example the way in which he managed to win at ROME against Stan the man: Basically, after a first set in which he was waiting his opponent he moved to a more aggressive path, in which he was forcing his opponent to accept the rallies..

BTW: You did not talk about Pete being a good coach or not, but this was one of the topics under discussion on the other thread so it remains in my post here..You see..  

Mmm I understand what you mean now  (with the fragile in the head) so would a coach (the correct one) help him in this area? yes is my view, thats why Djoko (with the "correct" coach helps him and he listens as I posted previous) he is more mature in his approach to help with the continue of his tennis career IMO

Thanxs for clearing up the Pete situation (I thought I was going even madder  )

I disagree with Veritas' description of fragile in the head. Well, I can't disagree with what he meant by it, but I'd define it differently. I agree that it fits Murray, but its due to his abilty to mentally take himself out of matches. I've watched him melt down in person and isn't pretty. He starts talking to himself, cussing at himself, at his racquet, at his coach. He has an ability to melt down rivaled by very few.

[FreeBird]

I disagree with Veritas' description of fragile in the head. Well, I can't disagree with what he meant by it, but I'd define it differently. I agree that it fits Murray, but its due to his abilty to mentally take himself out of matches. I've watched him melt down in person and isn't pretty. He starts talking to himself, cussing at himself, at his racquet, at his coach. He has an ability to melt down rivaled by very few.

Off-topic (what else is new with me??), but wouldn't this make him one of Babble's favorites?  Why don't I ever see Murray listed in Babble's favorites list???

[pawan89]

 

I disagree with Veritas' description of fragile in the head. Well, I can't disagree with what he meant by it, but I'd define it differently. I agree that it fits Murray, but its due to his abilty to mentally take himself out of matches. I've watched him melt down in person and isn't pretty. He starts talking to himself, cussing at himself, at his racquet, at his coach. He has an ability to melt down rivaled by very few.

Off-topic (what else is new with me??), but wouldn't this make him one of Babble's favorites?  Why don't I ever see Murray listed in Babble's favorites list???

 

[Alison2006]

why can't pete be a great coach?

Hi shanker, I missed this post

I think your gripe is with Tennisveritas    I was confused with this "Pete coach", I thought he was going into coaching 

I never mentioned this