Well, whether overtraining, virus recurrence, wrist problem or whatever - something was definitely wrong. It wasn't just a case of him playing too passively as he has so often done - he wasn't getting to the balls, he was slow - and that just isn't Andy. He is known (and quite often derided) for having so few unforced errors - the amount he had last night shows something was amiss.

I just hope he can sort it out reasonably quickly.

I didn't see the match but was obviously pretty devastated about the result but obviously nowhere in the same strastophere as Andy who has said this is the most devastating result of his career which I can understand.

I feel I need to take a step back here.  While some others have criticised to various degrees, usually perfectly constructively and with best intentions, his style of play at times, his GS performances etc,  I have until now often argued against some of these points.

What I always felt I was seeing was a very smooth progression up the rankings, increasingly better and more consistent GS results.  Yes, many, myself included would love absolute success quicker but as has been said, some players, particularly maybe with a more complex game, take more time to come through.

To me, it was a consistent improving path  ( for those who are led to frustration at times lucky they don't support say a GEM  ).  I wanted and still want him so much to succeed and still very much do and particularly in Grand Slams, yes, there have been recent disappointments, but I think he learns all the time, and he was progessing more.  Basically I was not unhappy.

However, we come to now, and the first ever Grand Slam where I petsonally really made him have an outstanding chance.  Others seem to have thought previous say US Opens or Aussie Opens might be his time.  I thought generally too little latter GS experience, basically too soon, not the time.  To me, this was the time.

Now I ask myself why it wasn't and look at what folk are saying, some of which they have said before.

I think there is a point that there a number of folk with real attacking games that have raised them against Andy, or rather more specifically raised them because they are in a Grand Slam.  This is rather to be expected, and the maybe worrying thing is Andy has not at times raised his game to match.  I have often said that I do not think he has to fundamentally change his game to be more attacking ( on the basis again that he was getting there and I was totally unconvinced he had to radically change it to win a GS ).  But these players are coming up to the plate at GSs with their A game, Andy occasionally has something like his C game, and that combination spells danger.  So to me he has at least got to be more at his top form at GSs and yes at times be more attacking and take players on more, change his emphasis ( and I believe he has that ability ) if not the whole basis of his game. 

So why is he sometimes not at his best at GSs ?   Overtraining ?  An interesting suggestion.  But I did notice that after Cincinnati, Andy did talk about having a week of hard work.  Who knows what that meant physically.  But athletes, particularly long distance athletes ( and GS tennis is to some extent an endurance sport ) taper down in the week before a race.  If he is really putting in very hard physical work coming to a Grand Slam I cannot believe that is very sensible.  He had his training period after Wimbledon. That should have contained much strength and endurance work, then good match practice in Canada and Cincinnati and to me a final week should have been some much gentler physical work while working on his game and tactics. Clearly we don't really know what has gone on, but I see an athlete who at times in GSs has looked jaded and with low energy levels, which are definitely things that you could see with an overtrained athlete.

The best answer in some ways, although still disappointing, would be if there is more unfortunate medical reasone coming in here, eg. virus or lingering effects of virues say against Verdasco in Australia and here or indeed wrist issues here.  There may once or twice have been some truth in this, and Andy I feel is not one to come out with such excuses, but there very clearly have not been medical issues every time in disappointing GS results.

I cannot believe that it is a pressure thing at Grand Slams.  Andy has always struck me as a positive fighter who is up for the big occasion and has a great record at winning finals and being up for Masters tournaments.  To me, I've always seen him as a winner.  It would be very strange if just Grand Slams themselves are having some phychological effect.

But something has gone wrong here ( maybe a combination ) and some of it repeated to an extent his previous experiences whereas I was hopeful that he was learning from these experiences and they wouldn't be repeated.

Andy has made his usual noises about learn from this defeat and move on.  He has also said he has had a really good season, his best ever, which to an extent is true.  He will probably end the season at least 3rd in the rankings, he was going into the US Open 3rd in Grand Slam points accumulated this season so will still end up very high there.  

But, everything else points to the fact that Andy should now be a serial Grand Slam winning threat and he does not appear to be yet.

Given, as I said, to me, this was the very first Grand Slam where I fully thought that, then I will take it as one big disappointment and still have faith in his ultimate achievements.

I do so hope that he and his team take time out though, as I am sure they will, to fully consider his preparation for Grand Slams and some of the repeating patterns within these GSs, then consider what they need to change, be it in prep or matchplay, and experiment with these changes even say in Masters tournaments.

Next year is going to be a very very big year I feel in the tennis career of Andy Murray.  Yes he is still relatively young but he is now at a stage where he himself knows that he needs to deliver at the very highest level.

Oh, and Andy, hope you can pick yourself up for the end of the season, and as I am at the O2 Arena for the World Tour Final, be good to see you there    

The Knight wrote:

---

The one thing i will say in his defence is that, as far as playing aggressively is concerned, we don't want him turning into Tursonov trying to hit every shot for a clean winner - he would lose what makes him a great player. He needs to improve how offensive he is, but this must involve playing percentage shots, keeping his opponents off balance and using the variety he is known for.

---

I agree with both of the above posts, but just wanted to answer this bit. Of course we don't want him turning into Tursunov, or indeed Gonzo or Verdasco or Tsonga, the point I was trying to make is that we know he's got the shots, so why doesn't he mix it up a bit more against players like this and make them remember how good he is?

When he does that, he nearly always wins, but against some players, he seems to wait until they give him the chance to start attacking, and if they don't until it's too late, he's stuffed.

It's fine to play the counter-punching game most of the time if you think that's your strength, but if someone it out-hitting you and not giving you the chance to attack, you have to take the initiative sometimes and make them think a bit.

 

Madeline wrote:

---

Well, whether overtraining, virus recurrence, wrist problem or whatever - something was definitely wrong. It wasn't just a case of him playing too passively as he has so often done - he wasn't getting to the balls, he was slow - and that just isn't Andy. He is known (and quite often derided) for having so few unforced errors - the amount he had last night shows something was amiss.

I just hope he can sort it out reasonably quickly.

---

I'm interested in this point about Andy being slow as if that was the case it must hold the key to his problem on Tuesday, one that may well make it unfair to compare to previous results.

I only caught the last six games of the match (French TV decided they'd show the Del Potro match in full) but on two occasions, my colleague said "what's wrong with Arndy Mooray? I didn't know he was so slow". I pointed out that he must be mistaken and that Andy is one of the best movers on the circuit - but it appears he was right.

 

Ah, the determination to find an explanation for everything, so very human ...

Sh*t happens. Cilic is a damned good player and Murray had an off day. And Murray was within a whisker of winning the first set - who knows what would have happened if he had?

Plus, don't forget my spendidly insightful point earlier about Murray not having a big flat forehand. it was so good that I think I will repeat it:

But I would say that Murray hasn't really got a big flat forehand to take back the initiative from an opponent who is on his game. He is reliant on his junk-balling, placement, and retrieving ability, to try and get the opponent off the boil.

Cilic is doing alright at the moment.