PDA

View Full Version : Andy Murray is a role model for women's tennis


laurie
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:22 PM
I like this article :devil:

It brings up a lot of things we've been discussing here recently:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article5957363.ece

The Times Tennis Correspondent hears that the fairer sex could do worse than incorporate some elements of the British No1's game into their own

Incorporating some facets of Andy Murray's richly-varied groundstoke game into their own could rid us of the robotic sameness of so much of women's tennis, according to Ray Moore
Neil Harman
Andy Murray as a role model for women's tennis! The suggestion was made to the Net Post by Ray Moore, the president of PM Sports Management, and an instrumental figure in turning the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells from a dusty dream over 35 years ago into one of the sparkliest gems in the tennis tiara. Breakfast with Charlie Pasarell, the tournament chairman and Ray is a last-day tradition in the desert, a chance to pick the brains of and listen to words of wisdom from two men with a century of devotion to the sport as players, politicians and passionate advocates.

Their drive in extolling the virtues of tennis in this panoramic neck of the woods has embellished the position of a championship that mixes the highest calibre of competition with the finest views that tennis can provide (bar perhaps, the Mediterranean Sea on a clear day in Monte Carlo) but does not feel the need to shout from the rooftops how good it is. And it is good. This year alone, it will bring some $250 million into the coffers of the Coachella Valley, the single most important event staged around these parts.

The two men are animated whenever they discuss tennis but it was when asked about what he felt about the 21-year-old Scot that Moore opened up memorably. His grouse was the sameness of so much of the women's game, now that Justine Henin has retired, Amelie Mauresmo wins fitfully (though she did triumph in the Open de Gaz in Paris last month), Martina Hingis has long gone and Martina Navratilova's style went out with the Ark. Moore, and many others, despair of the robotic similarity of so much of the higher echelon of the women's game and of those pressing behind. It is production line tennis.

Moore waxes lyrical about Murray. "When you see him, it's fabulous. He plays short and then he plays long. The one thing I don't like about the women's game today, is that they are like clones.They go left, right, left, right, bang, bang, bang. I don't see any of the women playing a short shot, playing a dropshot, playing a loop. I see Murray out of position, and he plays sort of a high topspin, like the Moon Ball Twins (Harold Solomon and Eddie Dibbs) who used these high things to get back into position. He's not slapping it when he's out of position. I really think the women could learn a lot from him if they took part of those elements there and incorporated them into their games.

Related Links
The Net Post: sorry, LTA, but there is a better way
The Net Post: could Kim Clijsters be planning a comeback?
The Net Post: Bubka looks to bring Great Britain crashing to earth
"I'm so impressed with Murray because he plays in a very unusual way from the rest of the guys on the tour. He changes the pace from shot to shot, he'll play a roll backhand and then he'll play a slice, then he'll play it long, they he'll hit it, and then he'll come in. He's one of those true, natural talents. And the thing that's you really have to take note on, is he's unbelievably quick. That's what allows him to do these things that he does. And great hands. How about the winner he hit off (Roger) Federer's smash? It wasn't like he was 10 feet behind the baseline. He moved in 10 feet, Federer nailed the smash, and he half volleyed it for the winner. How many people can do that?" Eloquent praise indeed for the British No.1.

Murray has thrived in the desert and the tournament continues to thrive for itself, something quite rare in these parlous financial times, when sponsoring sport is not on the high priority list for chief executive officers seeking to balance the company books. Were Moore and Pasarell not a mite concerned that getting in bed with a bank, in this case BNP Paribas, might dit uneasily with public perception? Nonsense, Moore replied. "We are proud to have BNP Paribas here. Before Charlie and I went to a third meeting with them in Paris, they had been here twice before. They came here on a really beautiful summer day.

"Finally we did go to Paris, and the day we made our presentation was September 15, the day Lehman Brothers went under. When we walked into the room, the BNP Paribas people said that if we hadn't flown this far they wouldn't have met with us because this was the worst day in banking history since 1929. That's how we started the final meeting. But tennis is the only sport they sponsor. They've had every single sport knocking on their door, but they've stayed with tennis, because firstly, they love the sport; secondly, the demographics work for them. They wanted to be our partner."

Moore would have been delighted had BNP Paribas signed a three year deal with a three year option. They came back and said to him they would sign for ten years, five down and five on approval. The deal was signed there and then. And what a boon it has been.

Lucemferre
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:26 PM
:help: I'd much rather ball bashers to murray any day :barf:

What has murray accomplished with that passive game? How many majors??

Olórin
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:28 PM
Fair and thought provoking comments. Forgot to mention that a lot of the men could learn something from him as well, Federer for one.

MBM
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:29 PM
bullshit...

there is a lot of thwacking the ball left/right/left/right in men's too! And to suggest there is no variety is beyond crap. Has this guy ever watched a WTA match???

BlameSerena
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:34 PM
Rubbish. Andy could learn something from MyRena.
If he's comparing him to anyone, maybe he should suggest Andy's style of play
to other male players. I feel as though a player should do what is best for him/her
and if that means "sameness" then that's what it means.

FoxyliciousKhat
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:42 PM
Fair and thought provoking comments. Forgot to mention that a lot of the men could learn something from him as well, Federer for one.

Puhleese, Federer does not need to learn anything from Andy Murray. Yes he has a winning record against Fed but that does not make him more accomplished or better, just a good match up compared to others.

Foxy

joăo.
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:54 PM
:weirdo:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle5957363.ece

Joseosu19
Mar 24th, 2009, 07:55 PM
bullshit...

there is a lot of thwacking the ball left/right/left/right in men's too! And to suggest there is no variety is beyond crap. Has this guy ever watched a WTA match???
Sadly, he is completely 100% on the spot. If you watched tennis before the "power" era then you know that today's game is pathetically one dimensional and often times hideous.

Olórin
Mar 24th, 2009, 08:01 PM
Puhleese, Federer does not need to learn anything from Andy Murray. Yes he has a winning record against Fed but that does not make him more accomplished or better, just a good match up compared to others.

Foxy

That was kinda my point, Federer has a lot more game than Murray. Federer's head is not in the right place. Murray has matured from a whiney brat into a tennis champion who has been able to beat Federer and Nadal back to back. Federer could learn a lot from Andy Murray in terms of maturing from the whiney sore-loser he is.

My underlying point was that there's a lot more to tennis than the actual game and technique. I was trying to override the quasi-elitist, sadly cliched, 'beautiful tennis' undertone of the article.

Olórin
Mar 24th, 2009, 08:03 PM
Sadly, he is completely 100% on the spot. If you watched tennis before the "power" era then you know that today's game is pathetically one dimensional and often times hideous.

What is the power era?

Since they started using graphite racquets in the early 80's? That's when power and athletic ability became predominant in tennis at the expense of the 'oh-my-gosh-that-lob-was-simply-breathtaking' days.

Dodoboy.
Mar 24th, 2009, 08:10 PM
British press can be so annoying sometimes :o

LoveFifteen
Mar 24th, 2009, 08:28 PM
There is a lot of validity to the assertion that many women on the WTA would benefit from not attempting to hit ridiculous winners when they are out of position.

Inktrailer
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:05 PM
The only role model Andy Murray should be is to scare young boys into why haircuts are important.

Inktrailer
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:08 PM
British press can be so annoying sometimes :o

It can, but to be fair this opinion is coming from Americans involved in IW, not a Brit.

Lucemferre
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:14 PM
Sadly, he is completely 100% on the spot. If you watched tennis before the "power" era then you know that today's game is pathetically one dimensional and often times hideous.

It's so much better than Arantxa's boring ass game.

Cp6uja
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:14 PM
vsqm0JwlZFc

:eek:

FoxyliciousKhat
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:17 PM
That was kinda my point, Federer has a lot more game than Murray. Federer's head is not in the right place. Murray has matured from a whiney brat into a tennis champion who has been able to beat Federer and Nadal back to back. Federer could learn a lot from Andy Murray in terms of maturing from the whiney sore-loser he is.

My underlying point was that there's a lot more to tennis than the actual game and technique. I was trying to override the quasi-elitist, sadly cliched, 'beautiful tennis' undertone of the article.

So Fed is a whiney sore-loser but when it's your fave it's cause she wants to win?! Fed has won 13 grand slams, he's not a young as he used to be and Nadal, Murray and Nole has matured into great players and major competition for him, just like Justine and others in her time did against Serena. It does not make him less of a champion or diminishes he accomplishments because he's not longer the player he was and or as dominant as before and or that a couple of players matches his game and are able to deal with him better than others.

I agree the article is stupid/and or leaves a lot to be desired, but you don't need to put down Fed to get your point across.

Foxy

TheBoiledEgg
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:28 PM
Murray is worse than watching paint dry.
even Ljubicic is exciting in comparison

BlameSerena
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:33 PM
It's so much better than Arantxa's boring ass game.

I wasn't around during that time, so I can't comment on her particular matches, but all I know is that this style of tennis seems to be more exciting. Not before watching the Williams Sisters did I find tennis in the least entertaining. Everyone will have their preferences, but I believe the purists will always like what they like no matter what. It seems that net play is not the norm anymore b/c the women can produce some amazing passing shots. And I don't think Venus or Serena or Maria for that matter only come to net accidentally. What is wrong with appreciating great baseliners? I just feel as though people are jumping on a bandwagon. Because the style is dominant does not mean it is ineffective, and therefore, why adjust?

An aside, Mauresmo is overlooked, but her game is diverse.

cn ireland
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:35 PM
So women should now be moaners that always have an excuse when they lose with a really boring game????

As you can guess, i'm not a fan of Andy's:lol:!

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:36 PM
This Murray is good

Olórin
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:40 PM
So Fed is a whiney sore-loser but when it's your fave it's cause she wants to win?! Fed has won 13 grand slams, he's not a young as he used to be and Nadal, Murray and Nole has matured into great players and major competition for him, just like Justine and others in her time did against Serena. It does not make him less of a champion or diminishes he accomplishments because he's not longer the player he was and or as dominant as before and or that a couple of players matches his game and are able to deal with him better than others.

I agree the article is stupid/and or leaves a lot to be desired, but you don't need to put down Fed to get your point across.

Foxy

Not putting Fed down, but he is a winey sore-loser. I have a lot of respect for him generally speaking, but that's a truth. So is Serena, but at least she has some fun with it. Also, she's whiney in general, while Federer is only whiney in defeat, the important distinction. Not sure while you're taking my facetious comments about Federer so personally. But for future reference I will make my points as I choose and I talk about Federer as I please.

This isn't even a men's tennis forum, I shouldn't have to worry about rubbing Federer admirers up the wrong way.

The article itseld isn't bad, (certainly not by the standard of a lot of tennis journalism) I just didn't like the tone of it that much, and the fact that it seemed to pick on the women (cliched almost).

FoxyliciousKhat
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:51 PM
Not putting Fed down, but he is a winey sore-loser. I have a lot of respect for him, but that's a truth. So is Serena, I don't hold it against her because she has some fun with it and at least manages to not break down in tears during a Grand Slam trophy presentation. Not sure while you're taking my facetious comments about Federer so personally. But for future reference I will make my points as I choose and I talk about Federer as I please.

The article isn't bad, (certainly not by the standard of a lot of tennis journalism) and is pretty fair on a lot points.

I'm not taking it personally I just find you did not need to use any playing in particular to make your point and if you did you would have used someone who is more of a complete base-liner to bring across your point. Fed in my opinion having accomplished as much as he has was kind of strange an example to use as Murray showing how to play tennis, as it is quite obvious that having won what he has he does know a thing or two about actually playing and winning. As for Fed crying it is what it is... I doubt he will be the first and I'm sure he won't be the last.

I never said you cannot speak or post what you want, but with the same token I think I have to right to also post and agree and or disagree with what is posted.

There is no need to make this an issue. I did not agree on a point you made and you have every right to respond but we can at least agree to disagree.

Foxy

Costanza
Mar 24th, 2009, 09:59 PM
http://www.murraysworld.com/img/news/other/andy-murray-haircut2.jpg
http://mediadb.kicker.de/news/1000/1020/39000/slideshow/598835/image_slshow_einzel_0_9.jpg
Role model:haha:

volta
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:03 PM
he obviously never saw Gonzo play for example :o

LDVTennis
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:14 PM
It's so much better than Arantxa's boring ass game.

Predictable response. Without mentioning your favorite fembots, the article manages to poke fun at them. How it also must have hurt to read that IW signed a 5 year deal with BNP Paribas, with a 5 year option. Guess BNP Paribas didn't care about the absence of your favorite fembots.

As for Arantxa, she was not a fembot. In his commentary for Fox Sports, Justin Gimelstob opined that the thing that makes Murray on defense so good is that he knows exactly where to hit the ball when he is out of position or in trouble. He loops it down the lines or angles it out of the middle of the court. This is key because on the men's tour the middle of the court is the domain of great forehands like those of Nadal and Federer.

Arantxa faced a similar problem with Steffi's forehand. What is amazing about Arantxa is that she figured out the problem all by herself. There was no Murray back then to serve as a model. That is why Arantxa was so original.

volta
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:15 PM
Predictable response. Without mentioning your favorite fembots, the article manages to poke fun at them. How it also must have hurt to read that IW signed a 5 year deal with BNP Paribas, with a 5 year option. Guess BNP Paribas didn't care about the absence of your favorite fembots.

As for Arantxa, she was not a fembot. In his commentary for Fox Sports, Justin Gimelstob opined that the thing that makes Murray on defense so good is that he knows exactly where to hit the ball when he is out of position or in trouble. He loops it down the lines or angles it out of the middle of the court. This is key because on the men's tour the middle of the court is the domain of great forehands like those of Nadal and Federer.

Arantxa faced a similar problem with Steffi's forehand. What is amazing about Arantxa is that she figured out the problem all by herself. There was no Murray back then to serve as a model. That is why Arantxa was so original.

do u have other favs besides WS?

Rome
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:17 PM
At this point in time the WTA and the ATP players (Murry included) use the same strat. And you know what that strat is? It's hit to the player's weakness for Murry it's his fearhand and other players its there backhand.

Costanza
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:18 PM
As well as a heck of a good tennis player,

apparently Muzza is pretty handy with his fists :boxing:

Watch your step Mr Constantinople!

As TBE said:"Murray is worse than watching paint dry":lol:

AnnaK_4ever
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:19 PM
Muzza for a role model??? :spit:

Who's next? Nadull?

Inktrailer
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:20 PM
vsqm0JwlZFc

:eek:

That's really good, like it!

MBM
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:20 PM
Sadly, he is completely 100% on the spot. If you watched tennis before the "power" era then you know that today's game is pathetically one dimensional and often times hideous.

But it isn't as extreme as he makes out. look at jankovic and radwanska. if it was all about the power, they wouldn't have had any success. Serena has incredible feel and venus hits incredible volleys: there's more than just power in alternate directions. these players along with seles are the ones who started the "power" era. don't get me wrong, I think this article is dead on when describing players like Safina, but the majority of players do more than just hit the ball one way, then the other.

And I don't think Murray is the one to use as a milestone...overuse of dropshots comes to mind...he abuses variety! Sometimes, the hard, flat ball into the open court gets the job done than a cocky dropshot.

TheBoiledEgg
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:21 PM
its a bit like saying Lourdes Dominguez Lino is a role model for mens tennis.

hankqq
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:23 PM
:spit: :rolls:

the minute I saw Neil Harman was the writer, I just knew it would be another Andy Murray Ass-Kissing Article :o I can't stand Murray and this Harman guy is so biased it's ridiculous :lol:

Inktrailer
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:26 PM
http://mediadb.kicker.de/news/1000/1020/39000/slideshow/598835/image_slshow_einzel_0_9.jpg
Role model:haha:

He's such a geek:lol: Did anyone see him speaking after his loss to Nadal? He picked up the microphone and looked at it like it was an alien:D

Still, he is a very good player, aside from this 'role-model' for womens tennis article.

TheBoiledEgg
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:28 PM
http://www.murraysworld.com/img/news/other/andy-murray-haircut2.jpg
http://mediadb.kicker.de/news/1000/1020/39000/slideshow/598835/image_slshow_einzel_0_9.jpg
Role model:haha:

just put a skirt on :tape:
what a big girls blouse :o

KournikovaFan91
Mar 24th, 2009, 10:54 PM
the men's game is equally one dimensional :rolleyes: they have a handful of great players and everyone assumes men's is better, like the Top 20 in both men's and women's are amazingly differen except maybe the top 5.

frenchie
Mar 24th, 2009, 11:34 PM
I love Andy's game
He has absolutely all the shots in tennis

I'm not a fan of his personality though

laurie
Mar 25th, 2009, 12:06 AM
I love Andy's game
He has absolutely all the shots in tennis

I'm not a fan of his personality though

I think a lot of people share that opinion.

raquel
Mar 25th, 2009, 12:07 AM
Predictable response. Without mentioning your favorite fembots, the article manages to poke fun at them. How it also must have hurt to read that IW signed a 5 year deal with BNP Paribas, with a 5 year option. Guess BNP Paribas didn't care about the absence of your favorite fembots.

As for Arantxa, she was not a fembot. In his commentary for Fox Sports, Justin Gimelstob opined that the thing that makes Murray on defense so good is that he knows exactly where to hit the ball when he is out of position or in trouble. He loops it down the lines or angles it out of the middle of the court. This is key because on the men's tour the middle of the court is the domain of great forehands like those of Nadal and Federer.

Arantxa faced a similar problem with Steffi's forehand. What is amazing about Arantxa is that she figured out the problem all by herself. There was no Murray back then to serve as a model. That is why Arantxa was so original.I totally agree LDV, you won't be surprised to know ;)

I think Andy could be role model for some women players. Some of the women now seem to have absolutely no Plan B. I was watching some of Radwanska v Wozniacki last week and most of it was absolutely awful. Sure, there are some bad men's matches but it wasnt so much the quality, it was more the lack of thought that was really embarrassing. Andy at least is nearly always thinking and working things out.

Ciarán
Mar 25th, 2009, 12:08 AM
:rolleyes::weirdo:

Inktrailer
Mar 25th, 2009, 12:09 AM
I think a lot of people share that opinion.

TO be fair to Murray, he was present at the Dunblane massacre and grew up in a town with that hanging over it ever since. It's not really surprising that he's a miserable bugger with a pissy attitude sometimes.

Dawson.
Mar 25th, 2009, 12:35 AM
So women should now be moaners that always have an excuse when they lose with a really boring game????

As you can guess, i'm not a fan of Andy's:lol:!

Always has an excuse? You obviously didn't see the IW final when he simply said to Nadal at the shake of hands - "too good". Doesn't sound like an excuse to me :shrug:

SM
Mar 25th, 2009, 02:57 AM
Puhleese, Federer does not need to learn anything from Andy Murray. Yes he has a winning record against Fed but that does not make him more accomplished or better, just a good match up compared to others.

Foxy
B.S


To have a winning arecord against any great champion (im talking 10+ slams) you have to have incredible talent. The fact he hasn't done this enough in majors has nothing to do with a lack of game, but rather mental strength.

Slammer7
Mar 25th, 2009, 03:40 AM
its a bit like saying Lourdes Dominguez Lino is a role model for mens tennis.

:worship:

Andy Murray has the same disease Gael Monfils has,PUSHERITIS. They both play the unnecessary clever shot instead of the simplest most effective shot. Murray just makes you want to scream sometimes JUST HIT THE DAMNED WINNER ALREADY. The criticism of the womens game used to be that the points were interminable and the rallies too long and boring, now it's too much wam bam thank you mam.:rolleyes: It's always something.:fiery: My criticism of some of the younger players isn't that they need more feel, but that they don't know how to come forward and end a point when it should be ended, and that they don't take enough balls out of the air and volley when they should. Too many young players restart the rally 2 or 3 times till they can hit a ground stroke winner or get an error. They are as scared of the net as tuna or mackerel. The last thing I want to see the women become are a bunch of pushers who are too damned clever for their own good.:rolleyes:

Joseosu19
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:06 AM
What is the power era?

Since they started using graphite racquets in the early 80's? That's when power and athletic ability became predominant in tennis at the expense of the 'oh-my-gosh-that-lob-was-simply-breathtaking' days.
Nope, the power era is when the players fell into the 'smash the hell out of the ball and hope it lands in' trap. Mindless ball bashing has taken over the majority of the tour. Not saying all players play this way, but far too many do to make women's tennis truly interesting.

Roookie
Mar 25th, 2009, 05:43 AM
:worship:

Andy Murray has the same disease Gael Monfils has,PUSHERITIS. They both play the unnecessary clever shot instead of the simplest most effective shot. Murray just makes you want to scream sometimes JUST HIT THE DAMNED WINNER ALREADY. The criticism of the womens game used to be that the points were interminable and the rallies too long and boring, now it's too much wam bam thank you mam.:rolleyes: It's always something.:fiery: My criticism of some of the younger players isn't that they need more feel, but that they don't know how to come forward and end a point when it should be ended, and that they don't take enough balls out of the air and volley when they should. Too many young players restart the rally 2 or 3 times till they can hit a ground stroke winner or get an error. They are as scared of the net as tuna or mackerel. The last thing I want to see the women become are a bunch of pushers who are too damned clever for their own good.:rolleyes:

But then you watch someone like Ivanovic going to the net at every single point, who can't cover it, can't volley, doesn't know what to do with overheads. If you can't do that just don't do it because its embarrassing.

Zauber
Mar 25th, 2009, 05:54 AM
This is silly.

tennnisfannn
Mar 25th, 2009, 07:08 AM
while I get wht he is trying to say about the WTA it is almost an insult to say they should learn from the ATP. What is wrong with learning frm fellow women. Why doesn't he focus on amelie's game instead for variety, why can't the wta learn about mental toughness from serena, why not learn determination from ElenaD on how to sat at the top even when your own serve is a severe liability-she has strenghthened her strengths to minimise er weakness.
Is he about to tell the ATP to learn from Justine?
This is not an article n Andy, it is intended to slight the wta.

The Witch-king
Mar 25th, 2009, 10:20 AM
I love Andy's game
He has absolutely all the shots in tennis

I'm not a fan of his personality though

What personality?

Oh god if I had to watch more than one player play like Murray I think I would stop watching tennis completely.

I wanted to die watching Murray vs Simon last year. It was HORRIBLY boring.

DevilishAttitude
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:24 PM
This thread amuses on me on so many levels.

I actually agree that Murray would be a good example for some WTA players. OK, certainly not the Williams Sisters or Ivanovic's of the world, but the likes of Jankovic's and Zvonareva's, who don't necessarily have the weaponary to hit winner after winner on every point should look at Murray and think yeah it's possible to be able to compete with a mix of styles, the occasional big serve, big winner, drop shots and net approach and defensive style. I'm not a big Murray fan, his personality irritates me, although he has matured IMO, but I view him as the Martina Hingis of the ATP. I mean although he got thrashed against Nadal on Sunday, at least he tried every gameplan possible to counteract the thrashing.

And there is no harm of WTA looking upto ATP players, when there tour is currently flourishing (OK, this might be harmed when Nadal resumes his clay dominance) but the WTA is floundering by comparison. I mean look at the zero attendance for practically all matches for them last week. Zvonareva vs Wozniacki was an absolutely dreadful match on them hitting midcourts soft balls and then making an immediate error was trying to be aggressive, with the usual poor serving, and that was the gameplan the whole match, and these 2 are supposed to be all court players! And that wasn't the only match which was a show of dreadful brainless play on the WTA side from all accounts.

It makes me laugh in this thread that when everyone criticises the WTA, the minute someone suggests them to look upto the ATP, its not as bad as it seems or even much better. Oh pleasee. lol. :rolleyes:

pica_pica
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:27 PM
It's UK people praising themselves all over again.

Inktrailer
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:31 PM
It's UK people praising themselves all over again.

*sigh*

It was said by an American.

Avid Merrion
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:43 PM
It makes me laugh in this thread that when everyone criticises the WTA, the minute someone suggests them to look upto the ATP, its not as bad as it seems or ever much ever. Oh pleasee. lol. :rolleyes:

:lol: i know, right? perhaps suggesting Murray as a role model for womens tennis is a bit extreme, but where's the harm in looking elsewhere for some fresh ideas?
"head in the sand, we're alright thanks very much" attitude really won't help improve the WTA product and boy does it need any help it can get.....

MaBaker
Mar 25th, 2009, 04:44 PM
Well, he does acts like a girl sometimes...

laurie
Mar 25th, 2009, 05:39 PM
while I get wht he is trying to say about the WTA it is almost an insult to say they should learn from the ATP. What is wrong with learning frm fellow women. Why doesn't he focus on amelie's game instead for variety, why can't the wta learn about mental toughness from serena, why not learn determination from ElenaD on how to sat at the top even when your own serve is a severe liability-she has strenghthened her strengths to minimise er weakness.
Is he about to tell the ATP to learn from Justine?
This is not an article n Andy, it is intended to slight the wta.

If I remember a lot of male players and ex players/commentators like McEnroe constantly praised Henin's game, they thought they could learn something from her. I think that is bourne out by the fact that both Sampras and Edberg did video tributes in her honour last December in Belgium.

T. Ennis
Mar 25th, 2009, 06:09 PM
One of Andy's favourites:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1au7y4rUOM
Maybe he could do some women's coaching after he retires this year.

serenus_2k8
Mar 25th, 2009, 06:25 PM
I think its partly true. Andy plays great tennis that is amazing to watch. Say what you will but he is certainly becoming more and more of a crowd puller so it clearly has some truth to it ;)

Olórin
Mar 25th, 2009, 06:56 PM
Nope, the power era is when the players fell into the 'smash the hell out of the ball and hope it lands in' trap. Mindless ball bashing has taken over the majority of the tour. Not saying all players play this way, but far too many do to make women's tennis truly interesting.

Well Seles was doing this in the 90's. Graf's forehand was at times atrocious error-wise, often with her it was very much hit and hope. She lived by her aggressive game and often died by it. Weren't these two players the world number one and two in the late 80's and early 90's? So nope, not at all clear to me when this 'mindless' power era began.

LUVMIRZA
Mar 25th, 2009, 06:58 PM
Oh dont!!! The Brits again. Andy is such a pusher:o and got a huge thrashing last week from the CMonster:lol: I guess the Women can look up at Justine & Amelie's game styles for variety play. Martina Hingis possesed all shots in her pocket except a power game. There are enough great WTA players who possess/possesed great games. No need to find a new role model.

mboyle
Mar 25th, 2009, 07:19 PM
Sigh...it really is disappointing that people who surely must be intelligent enough to land a job at a legitimate newspaper waste their time with such rubbish as this article. As if a player who has been developing her game one way for decades could snap her fingers and turn into Martina Hingis because some British journalist with a deadline Sunday at 5 wishes it.

Tennis players respond to other tennis players, and craft their game from ages 8 to about 16 to win on tour, come hell or high water. Right now, there is no need to develop the kind of variety that Murray has. At such a time as this variety would lend an advantage, I'm sure we will see it in droves. We did not see unrelenting power in the game until it became necessary to beat Monica Seles (and Graf, to a lesser extent).

starin
Mar 25th, 2009, 08:01 PM
:spit:
this article is kinda sickening in it's praise of Andy Murray. And I hope women's tennis doesn't one day look like a bunch of Andy Murrays. We don't need a 100 pushers playing 50+ rallies, just waiting for an error. If the writer really wants to see that then watch an AMG/Camille Pin match.