As an armchair tennis fan, I have found the recent media hype over Andy Murray rather intriguing.
For a start, I'm not used to the British guy being the favourite. There is a reason teams like Accrington Stanley and Hull City (I have been a fan since the old division three days).
Having beaten Roger Federer twice this year, and Rafael Nadal once, Murray has become the bookmakers' odds-on bet to win the first Grand Slam of the year.
One must wonder, though, if it is too good to be true? The British seem to be notorious under-achievers, and this just seems like one of those moments where the hype has caused us all to suddenly "realise" that Murray is going to be better than Federer!
Murray seems to be different to the British sportsman stereotype: humble, hard-working, and always falling short. Considering he has spent a decent (or not-so-decent) amount of time injured, becoming No. 4 in the world at the tender age of 21, he actually has the potential to win Grand Slams.
Is he ready yet?
Early season form, for any sport, is often misleading. Look at Tottenham or Hull in the English Premier League. I like Murray, and would definitely like to see him win a Grand Slam this year.
It all depends on how he does in five-set games. We all saw the Masters Cup, and what happens if you beat Roger Federer, then play two days later.