Sign up for our Tennis newsletter:
Subscribe
Thanks for signing up. You can sign up for more teams by clicking .
March Madness Watch the action live on CBS: View it now »

Andy Murray, WTF Happened?? and Why Tennis Tears Are Good

Whitaker W H Chambers III by Correspondent Written on January 31, 2010
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA - JANUARY 31:  Andy Murray of Great Britain reacts after a point in his men's final match against Roger Federer of Switzerland during day fourteen of the 2010 Australian Open at Melbourne Park on January 31, 2010 in Melbourne, Australia.  (Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images) Ryan Pierse/Getty Images

Tennis is a lot like scenes from old western shootouts. It's one on one standoffs, with one person meeting their end.

Watching today's Australian Open final was akin to watching the challenger pointing his gun at John Wayne's legs and arms. On the other side, John Wayne just points and shoots straight at the challenger's heart.

Guess who won.

I was not a fan of Andy Murray's style and, in November, declared Murray "a top five fad".

The passiveness, the serve, the forehand, the attitude. They just pissed me off.

But, over the last 12 days, I saw an attacking forehand, a consistent first and second serves, a positive attitude and an overall aggressiveness against Rafael Nadal, that just knocked me off my feet. Mainly over the improvement in all these areas in just three months.

I reasoned that, Murray is already a great returner and a very good volleyer with soft hands, so all he needed was a little aggressiveness, a finishing baseline shot, and a consistent serve.

And since Murray displayed all of these in the first two weeks, I stated "Andy Murray on track to becoming best player in the world". Not only that, I thought, the Andy Murray Era is about to dawn on tennis, because no other young player has that combination.

Not too illogical?

What the hell happened? Where was the forehand? The serve? The bloody aggressiveness?

Why would he revert to that tennis style? Why didn't he go for his shots when he had the chance? Why would anybody not use all their bullets in a shootout?

Who knows. It goes without saying, it has a little something to do with the Swiss tennis genius, on the other side of the net. But I'm not sure, if it was more Roger's excellence or Murray's passiveness.

Also, about crying in tennis.

In the 1980 Wimbledon final, the 1981 winner was crying in the locker-room.

In the 2007 Wimbledon final, the 2008 winner was crying in the locker-room.

In 2009, in Melbourne, the runner up was broken and broke down in tears that were broadcast across the world.

He has won three of the next four slams.

So crying is a good sign.

Like (0)
Share This
Vote Now! - Author Poll

What surprised you about the final?

  • Federer's excellence
  • Murray's passiveness
vote to see results
Results - Author Poll

What surprised you about the final?

  • Federer's excellence

    54.5%
  • Murray's passiveness

    45.5%
  • Total votes: 33
Crop_45x45
or to post this comment

6 Comments

There are no comments yet. Get the conversation started by leaving the first comment

Loading more comments...
posted just now
  • Loading...
  • Nobody has liked this comment yet
Cancel

This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete