To I killed Bill: We are not all British here....

To Razvan (who said: CNajl, "I served so bad that­ anyone would have­ looked great against me­ tonight"... That's not­ Simon Reed, it's a­ decent guy speaking about his­ opponent): Well, I know­ only one player in the world who has NEVER played down­ his opponent in the moment of defeat. And that's­ Fed himself. Although that elevates him even further­ above the rest of the field, I don't see anything­ directly wrong with Andy's statement at all,­ considering it was said moments after a very­ disappointing loss. In addition to that, shortly before­ the game Murray humbly and respectfully recognised that­ although he had a significant statstical advantage,­ Federer is the kind of player who can make you look­ very poor indeed. I think Andy will recognise that­ that's exactly what happened yesterday, rather than­ himself just playing poorly. At least when he's had­ time to settle in and reflect. My compatriot Robin­ Söderling similarly said before the French Open final­ that "Every time I've played Roger it felt as­ I didn't play nearly as well as I should have, but­ I am starting to realise now after nine straight losses­ that that's simply down to Roger tearing my game­ apart and making me look that bad". Again, I­ maintain that Andy's a decent enough guy but one­ who loves to win and hates to loose. That combination­ makes most of his competitors say equally less­ thought-through stuff.... If I am gonna complain, it is­ not about that but rather about the fact that Murray­ has all the weaponry and armour to play an aggressive­ game against basically any opponent, but uses them­ poorly to rather just rely on mistakes from the other­ side of the net. Sometimes his playing style reminds me­ of Chinese defense table-tennis players of old... And­ THAT is truly sad. / M

To Razvan (who said: CNajl, "I served so bad that­ anyone would have­ looked great against me­ tonight"... That's not­ Simon Reed, it's a­ decent guy speaking about his­ opponent): Well, I know­ only one player in the world who has NEVER played down­ his opponent in the moment of defeat. And that's­ Fed himself. Although that elevates him even further­ above the rest of the field, I don't see anything­ directly wrong with Andy's statement at all,­ considering it was said moments after a very­ disappointing loss. In addition to that, shortly before­ the game Murray humbly and respectfully recognised that­ although he had a significant statstical advantage,­ Federer is the kind of player who can make you look­ very poor indeed. I think Andy will recognise that­ that's exactly what happened yesterday, rather than­ himself just playing poorly. At least when he's had­ time to settle in and reflect. My compatriot Robin­ Söderling similarly said before the French Open final­ that "Every time I've played Roger it felt as­ I didn't play nearly as well as I should have, but­ I am starting to realise now after nine straight losses­ that that's simply down to Roger tearing my game­ apart and making me look that bad". Again, I­ maintain that Andy's a decent enough guy but one­ who loves to win and hates to loose. That combination­ makes most of his competitors say equally less­ thought-through stuff.... If I am gonna complain, it is­ not about that but rather about the fact that Murray­ has all the weaponry and armour to play an aggressive­ game against basically any opponent, but uses them­ poorly to rather just rely on mistakes from the other­ side of the net. Sometimes his playing style reminds me­ of Chinese defense table-tennis players of old... And­ THAT is truly sad. / M

Andy Murray should realise with his large following­ that it is not just Roger and Nadal he needs to beat to­ win slams.There are about six I know are waiting for­ the chance to win this coming Australian Open slam in­ Melbourne.keep dreaming

Andy Murray should realise with his large following­ that it is not just Roger and Nadal he needs to beat to­ win slams.There are about six I know are waiting for­ the chance to win this coming Australian Open slam in­ Melbourne.keep dreaming

hey destong09. do you actually understand how the group­ system works, how can soderling, nadal and djokovic all­ possibly make the semi finals when they are in the same­ group. i think it'll be soderling, djokovic,­ federer and murray in semi finals and then it's­ anyones tournament

Davis cup doesn't count for ATP rankings, methinks.

everyone said that federer guarantee to end the year as­ #1 ranking i hope so couze i am big fan for him but­ waht if nadal won the rest of his matchs and won the­ title and at the same time federe lost and didnt reach­ the sf its means the gap between them became 45 pts but­ nadal still have the davis cup and i think he can add­ extra pts to his balance .......so pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez­ someone say that i am wrong

Thank you very much dato! I expected this explanation­ from eurosport article, but i guess that's too much­ to expect from them.

no matter what you say, Murray lovers, he could phrase­ it in a little more fortunate way than "anyone­ would have looked good against me, the way I played­ today". Don't you agree with that? Saying that­ you don't like the way you served is fine, but this­ is a borderline insult to Federer. Anyway, I still­ don't understand why people think that their serve­ is somehow independent from them. This is not Formula­ One when you can say "I think I am a good driver­ but my stupid mechanic stuffed up when I changed­ tyres". You can't say "I am a good player­ but my serve is bad", because your serve is part­ of you being a good player!

There are several differrent scenarios in this group­ and there is a strong chance that fed wont qualify :
1.­ If fed loses in straight sets and myrray wins his match­ delpo and murry will qualify and fed goes to 3rd place.­ 2. I if myrray wins in decider and delpo wins in­ straight sets delpo and murray will qualify. 3. if fed­ loses in decider and murry wins in decider then 3 men­ will have the same win-loss and set balance and game­ balanace will be crucial (in this case fed will qualify­ 99%. he now has 32-22). 4. If fed loses in decider and­ murray wins in straight sets, then murray will win the­ group and the game balanace will decide the second­ place - fed or juan martin. 5. in fed wins in 3 sets­ and verdasco wins in 3 sets then 3 players will have­ same statistics and game balance will be crucial­ between them. fed of course win group in this case. 6.­ If verdasco wins in straight sets and fed defeats delpo­ verdasco and federer will qualify.

So it is a kind of­ very difficult group.

Can anyone explain me this part of the article, when­ they say that Federer MUST win to get to the semis,­ whereas "Murray and Spain's Fernando Verdasco­ face off with the winner earning the chance to claim a­ semi-final spot." So what they mean is that if­ Verdasco wins he has a chance to qualify with just one­ victory? Whereas Federer having won two matches risks­ to reach the semis if he loses? Do they have any idea­ about what they are writing? Or they just assume that­ Andy will win and by the winner they mean Murray?­ Anyway what happens if Murray and DelPo (i hope not)­ win their next matches? There will be three players­ with 2 victories. Who reaches the semis? Thank you!

mr.murray listen up-go back to school and make sure­ that u sit close enough to master/profesor when he is­ lecturing,because that exactly happened yesterday...not­ only to have a big mouth-i didnt serve well,so anyone­ could beat me-roger didnt serve well either...he swiped­ court with you as well as he did on us open final 08 in­ 2nd and 3rd set,even 1st wasnt too bad...great­ performance from roger,he showed again,that when he­ raises his level almost no one is able to follow it...

Roger is already the greatest player of all time­ (though some still argue that Laver is the greatest­ one). Hope he can stay healthy and achieve more before­ he retired. Further records that Roger can shot at­ :

1) Tie or break Sampras's record 6 yrs at end yr­ #1
2) First player to reach 300 weeks at the #1­ ranking.
3) Tie or break Sampras's record of 7­ Wimbleton title
4) Graf's record of 22 single­ Grandslam by a tennis player (still possible if Roger­ could continue his pace to win 1-2 GS a yr in the next­ 3-4 yrs before he turns 32 of age)
5) Win four­ consecutive Glan Slams in one calendar yr or across 2­ yr (something he is still unable to achieve as Laver­ did...supposed this yr he has the best chance to do it­ )
6) Jimmy Connor's record of most ATP titles won­ 109 (#2 Lendl 94, #3 McEnroe 77, #4 Sampras &­ Borg 64). Federer current has 61 titles ..... mostly­ this is the hardest record to break. Hope he can at­ least get to the top 3 by the time he retired. Go­ Roger !

For I Killed Bill, please blame the reporters of­ Murray's stories for the hatred against him. The­ reporters pillory Murray in the hope of making him­ famous, but people can develop hatred in this deceit­ and cheap points. People can read between the lines­ when you exaggerate on Murray's win. You have to­ recall how thee careers of several upstarters were­ killed in this manner. They should leave upstarters to­ develop.

I agree with Walsh705, also i have never seen Murray­ serve the number of double faults he did yesterday, Fed­ maybe the best player in the world but even he cant­ force people to serve double faults!

You know it never ceases to amaze me how much @#$% u­ read in this section when Andy Murray has just­ played.
What a bunch of tossers u lot are.
Face facts -­ Murray is a great player although he may not show the­ consistency of others just yet he is still a great­ player.
Last night was a very good game and no matter­ what the Federer arse lickers say the score does not­ reflect how close the match was until halfway through­ the last set.
As for Murray being boring and playing­ tennis straight from a tennis manual I think u should­ take a close look at the attributes Murray shows week­ in week out - He is without doubt the best returner in­ the game at the moment he reads other peoples games­ better than most,he has a devastating array of shots to­ play from ,he has a stunning knowledge of the game and­ how other players play and if you lot can read­ properly u will note that he is nothing but civilized­ in his comments regarding other players.
As far as last­ night was concerned Murray was bang on the button - he­ played pants- an honest enough observation most would­ think !
On top of that in the third set Federer played­ probably the best tennis he has played in months in­ which case he wouls beat most players in the top ten.

Once again when Murrays first serve isnt there his­ second serve just isnt good enough, you could see in­ the second set he was scraping wins while Federer was­ getting stronger and though i didnt see much of the­ last set because the sattelite link went but it was 1-1­ then when it came back it was 5-1 so i am pretty sure­ Murray couldnt have got many first serves in. Murray­ did look lethargic though after the first set, seem to­ be a common trait since he has bulked up

Cannot understand the dislike for Murray. He is spot on­ and he did not play well enough and what he is saying­ is any top player would have beaten him serving like­ that. Why is honesty described as arrogance. He is­ probably Britain's greatest mens player ever and is­ unfortunate to be playing when the mens game is so­ strong. Get behind him appreciate his talents and enjoy­ the fact that we have a world class tennis player.­ Would people be so harsh if he was not a Scot.

Yes, the big thing about Federer or any better playert­ is that he can make your serve pants. No complaints.